tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Aug 02 22:41:54 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Klingon math, et al
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Klingon math, et al
- Date: Wed, 3 Aug 94 10:37:58 EDT
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>; from "Mark E. Shoulson" at Aug 2, 94 6:09 pm
~mark, your mailer is losing its mind. It shuffles in random
other mail in the middle of your stuff, making it somewhat of a
challenge to follow.
Still, I respect your read of TKD on the use of the {-lu'}
suffix and if you are correct, I think Okrand did one whale of
a poor job describing it in TKD. It is not that his description
could have been better. It is that his description is bad.
It describes all the variations of prefixes that have subjects
that get converted into objects and it does not mention the
option of a use of {-lu'} that does not imply an object in the
finished translation. It should have, if such exists. Period.
There is no defense for the argument that it is okay for there
to be a no-object use of {-lu'} with no explicit description of
it in TKD 4.2.5.
Lawrence, please put this on your short list of stuff to ask
Okrand about. Next to the absence of Sentence-As-Subject, this
is the one thing in TKD that frustrates me the most. If he
meant it, he should have said it. He didn't say it.
charghwI'