tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jan 29 21:38:23 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: -wI'
Hovjaj 96078.2 ghItlh David Barron:
>> Could someone explain the controversy surrounding the use of
>> -wI' with the intended meaning of "thing which is"? I have read the
>> HolQeD article arguing against it, what's the arguement for it?
>
>It *is* mentioned in TKD but only in the very back of the
>book, page 167. That give is some weight however there is no
>other mention of this usage in TKD nor any other Okrand
>canon that I am aware of.
nuqjatlh? Check out TKD page 19-20. Okrand also uses the suffix in many
words in the dictionary, as well as in the language tapes (for example,
{lupwI'} "jitney").
SuStel
Hovjaj 96079.7