tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu May 25 10:42:10 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: je je je
- From: "Lawrence M. Schoen" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: je je je
- Date: Thu, 25 May 1995 13:42:10 -0400
> I have personally tended to use {je} after the second noun and
> after every subsequent noun simply because it clarified the
> difference between nouns joined by conjunctions and noun-noun
> possessive constructions mixed into a string of nouns joined
> with a conjunction. By your probably correct interpretation, I
> should say:
>
> trI'Qal pu'HIch betleH je vIneH.
>
> So, do I want trI'Qal's phaser and sword, or do I want trI'Qal
> as well?
>
> charghwI'
Or maye you mean you want trI'Qal's phaser and *a* sword, but not necessarily
hers.
What I like about this is the delightful humor this sort of ambiguious structure
will generate. Doubtless there were lots of jokes in the original Shakespeare
which took advantage of triplets of nouns and the confounding of possession,
concatenation and (since it was spoken and run together) compounding.
Lawrence
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:: Dr Lawrence M Schoen, Director :: The KLI is a nonprofit ::
:: The Klingon Language Institute :: tax exempt corporation ::
:: POB 634, Flourtown, PA 19031 USA :: DaH HuchlIj'e' ghonob ::
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:: [email protected] :: [email protected] ::: 215/836-4955 ::
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::