tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Apr 17 12:36:43 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: lutHom
According to R.B Franklin:
>
>
> Fri, 14 Apr 1995 ghItlh DaQtIq:
...
> > ratlh latlh ghop petaQpu' quvHa' vIjach
>
> One of the things I've wanted to ask Okrand, is whether it is okay to
> put {-Ha'} on a verb when it is used adjectivally. Although I think it
> would be very useful and it would seem to make perfect sense, Sec. 4.4.
> seems to indicate otherwise...
TKD makes it sound as if only {-qu'} could be used for this,
though on Conversational Klingon, in the number section, we
have the example {wa'maH yIHmey lI'be'} for "ten useless
tribbles". My conservative view on this is that it is okay to
use {-qu'} and {-be'} and not okay to use anything else until
Okrand says so, but Okrand could say so any day now. Certainly
{-Ha'} would be the next most likely candidate for a valid
choice, but until Okrand says so, I'll tend to favor work
arounds, like:
> The alternative would be to say
> {quvHa'bogh petaQpu'} instead.
majQa'!
> yoDtargh
charghwI'
--
\___
o_/ \
<\__,\
"> | Get a grip.
` |