tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Aug 19 19:24:13 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Hamlet comments
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Hamlet comments
- Date: Mon, 19 Aug 1996 22:24:04 -0400 ()
- Priority: NORMAL
On Mon, 5 Aug 1996 07:07:35 -0700 Nick Nicholas
<[email protected]> wrote:
...
> >2) Is {wInolpu'bogh} p7 a typo, or is there a verb form of {nol}?
>
> Whoops! Give the man a cigar: yes, that is a booboo; what we meant to say was
> wImolpu'bogh.
While you are passing out cigars, you might wish to note the repeated use of {lu-} on verbs
whose subject is a group noun, which should be grammatically singular, as in {'a cho'meH
vortIbraS luwIv yejquv, 'e' pIH leSSovwIj.}
^^
This is not in any way meant to slight the amazing accomplishment of this delightful little
tome. And I'm not suggesting that it be corrected in a later edition. I couldn't bear to
watch you rework the iambic pentameter around every occurance of THAT little booboo.
Of course, I guess I could be wrong in interpreting TKD's "Inherently plural nouns are
treated grammatically as singular nouns in that singular pronouns [verbal prefixes] are
used to refer to them..." on 3.3.2, page 24. Perhaps it only refers to nouns like {ray',
cha, chuyDaH je} which have corresponding singular versions? jISovlaHbejbe'.
> --
> NON ME TENENT VINCVLA NON ME TENET CLAVIS STETIT PVELLA RVFA TVNICA SIQVIS
> Nick Nicholas http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~nsn Linguistics
> QVAERO MEI SIMILES ET ADIVNGOR PRAVIS EAM TETIGIT TVNICA CREPVIT EIA
> [email protected] University of Melbourne
> ARCHIPOETAE CONFESSIO E CARMINIBVS BVRANIS
charghwI'