tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Sep 09 04:06:57 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
tu'lu' vs. lutu'lu'
- From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]>
- Subject: tu'lu' vs. lutu'lu'
- Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 16:00:18 -0400
I thought of something a little frightening this morning, and now it's
worse because I have a problem with the canon.
We use "tu'lu'" pretty often, at least I do. And I rarely think about it.
It occurred to me that "-lu'" requires a "lu-" prefix for plural objects,
according to 4.2.5, and the PK phrase "to'baj 'uS lughoDlu'bogh" for "stuff
toebadge legs." This would imply that I have to re-read all my text
carefully and watch for things like "tlhInganpu' tu'lu'" and change them to
"lutu'lu'".
Then I remembered a canon phrase from the phrasebook: naDev tlhInganpu'
tu'lu'. Oh my. Is this a typo in the phrasebook? A thinko on Okrand's
part? Grammaticalization of "tu'lu'"? Help.
~mark, confused Grammarian.