tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Mar 18 10:10:34 2015

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: [Tlhingan-hol] A long word

SuStel ([email protected]) 

On 3/18/2015 12:28 PM, Alan Anderson wrote:

On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Anthony Appleyard
<[email protected]> wrote:

SuchchuqnISqa'moHlaHlaw'taHneSghachHommeyqoqrajmo'

V:visit VS1:each_other VS2:need VS3:[do_again|resume] VS4:cause VS5:be_able
VS6:apparently VS7:continuous VS8:honorific VS9:-ation* NS1:diminutive
NS2:pl_gen NS3:so_called NS4:your_pl_nonsentient NS5:due_to


I have a semi-tangential nitpick. What are you using that analyzes
{-raj} as "your_pl_nonsentient"? The {-ra'} vs. {-raj} distinction is
based on ability to use language, not ability to experience
sensations.
He is probably thinking of the common science-fiction usage; see <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentience#Science_fiction>, which even includes a Star Trek example.
It's still not correct, but even the definition "capable of using language" is subject to exceptions. 

--
SuStel
http://www.trimboli.name/

_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol

Back to archive top level