tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Dec 04 19:35:42 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: wamwI' yIn pem
On Mon, 4 Dec 1995, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
> >Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 13:04:08 -0800
> >From: "R.B Franklin" <[email protected]>
>
> FWIW, Okrand uses "tu'be'lu'" instead of "tu'lu'be'" usually. I think both
> ways make sense.
I realized that I meant to say {tu'be'lu'} after I posted my message. {{;-(
> Also, for plural animals it technically should be "lutu'be'lu'"
According to TKD p39, {tu'lu'} appears to be some kind of fixed form which
doesn't use {lu-} even when the object is plural. To support this, we
have several canon examples:
naDev puqpu' tu'lu'. (TKD p.39)
naDev tlhInganpu' tu'lu'. (TKD p.171)
QuvlIjDaq yIH tu'be'lu'jaj. (PK) (The translation given is "tribbles")
DujvamDaq tlhIngan nuH tu'lu'bogh pov law' Hoch pov puS. (S7) (The
translation given is "weapons")
moQDaq DuQwI'Hommey jej tu'lu'. (SP2)
> >~mark, did you ever forward our "wish list" to Okrand?
> I didn't, Lawrence did.
maj.
> ~mark
yoDtargh