tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Nov 22 17:02:40 1993
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: nujDaq qam lanpu' vay'
- From: Peter Garza <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: nujDaq qam lanpu' vay'
- Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1993 19:02:18 -0600 (CST)
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> from "Mark E. Shoulson" at Nov 22, 93 10:11:58 am
>
>
> >From: Peter Garza <[email protected]>
> >Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1993 19:17:00 -0600 (CST)
>
> >> >From: Peter Garza <[email protected]>
> >> >Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1993 22:53:57 -0600 (CST)
>
> >>
> >> > tlhIngan Hol jatlhbogh loDvaD bIja'taH vIja'ta'. 'IjtaH Holvam
> >> >vIjatlh 'e' Sovbogh juppu'wIj wa' je 'ej Haghqu'choH ghaH.
> >>
> >> "juppu'wI'"; they're sentient (I hope!). Do you mean "one of my friends
> >> who know I speak Klingon"? Then the "wa'" comes *first*. When numbers
[...]
>
> >yup, my friends can speak (just not Klingon ;). jIghItlhHa'pu'.
>
> >In TKD 5.2, Okrand writes, "Numbers are used as nouns." I tried to use the
> >N-N rule. Maybe something like juppu'wI'vo' wa' (one from my friends).
>
[...]
> pragmatics to fall back on. I'm not sure I trust that use of "-vo'",
> though. Partitive use ("some from many") often isn't the same as ablative
> (motion away from). It's possible there's no good way to say this without
I wasn't too sure about that either. "-vo'" was just the closest thing I
could find. I really doubt it's correct.
> recasting with a verb and all, but I wouldn't sweat it. There's always
> just {jupwI'}.
True.
> are pronouns? They're all chuvmey, and as such could have grammar that's
> peculiar almost to each individual member. Okrand also says that "'e'" is
Oh, I see. I can see the ambiguity, since they are chuvmey. va, tlhIngan
neHlu'DI' nuqDaq ghaHtaH?
[...]
>
> >> ~mark
>
> >Peter Garza
> >[email protected]
>
>
> ~mark
>
>
Peter Garza
[email protected]