tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Feb 27 18:36:22 2006

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

• Index by Date
• Index by Thread
• Index by Author

Re: {ghung} and {'oj} as stative verbs?

Alan Anderson ([email protected])

• From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: {ghung} and {'oj} as stative verbs?
• Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 15:02:26 -0500
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
• References: <[email protected]>

On Feb 27, 2006, at 4:29 AM, Philip Newton wrote:

> ... I thought at first that Klingon
> uses a verb "jIghung"...

You indeed should think this, because that's exactly what TKD says it  
does.

> ...but then I considered whether it might be the
> same construction as English, since predicate adjectives work like
> verbs in Klingon, so {jIghung} might well be "I am hungry" rather than
> "I hunger".

nuqjatlh?  {jIghung} *is* literally "I am hungry."

It sounds like you're thinking about this backwards.  What you're  
calling "predicate adjectives" *are* verbs in Klingon.  Maybe you're  
worried that TKD might be wrong when it says "be hungry"?  I think  
that's a silly thing to worry about.

-- ghunchu'wI'

• References:
  • {ghung} and {'oj} as stative verbs?
    • From: "Philip Newton" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Klingon word for "Bookmarklet"/"Favelet"?
• Next by Date: Re: Klingon word for "Bookmarklet"/"Favelet"?
• Previous by thread: {ghung} and {'oj} as stative verbs?
• Next by thread: Re: {ghung} and {'oj} as stative verbs?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level