tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Mar 07 20:33:11 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: KLBC: Q about -lu'

HomDoq writes:
>1. can -lu' be used to express general statements as in
>not DungDaq pumlu' reH bIngDaq pumlu' ...

I don't have a problem with this usage.

>I can't really say, whether or not
>bortaS bIr jablu'DI' reH QaQqu' nay'
>is in support or totally unrelated...

I vote "slightly unrelated" -- not totally.  The "passive voice"
interpretation of {-lu'} gives us "when cold revenge is served..."
but a strict "indefinite subject" interpretation yields "when one
serves cold revenge...."

Try another example from the Appendix:  {quSDaq ba'lu''a'} "Is this
seat taken?"  I'd say this is definitely "in support".

>2. (even less likely) can it be used to express general
>rules of behaviour as in
>.. vaj DungDaq pumlu' 'e' vInIDbe'lu'
>("thus one doesn't try to fall upward", really meaning
>"thus one SHOULD not try to fall upward")

The {vI-} prefix looks totally out of place; I'll ignore it for now.
The phrasing seems a bit weak, but I think the general idea is valid.
Perhaps {...vaj DungDaq pumlu' not net nID}.

-- ghunchu'wI'               batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj

Back to archive top level