tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Mar 10 10:00:15 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
No Subject
96-03-07 05:37:08 EST, Marc Ruehlander writes:
>not DungDaq pumlu' reH bIngDaq pumlu' ...
>
>(which is supposed to mean "one never falls upward,
>one always falls downward")
>
>I can't really say, whether or not
>
>bortaS bIr jablu'DI' reH QaQqu' nay'
>
>is in support or totally unrelated...
>
>2. (even less likely) can it be used to express general
>rules of behaviour as in
>
>.. vaj DungDaq pumlu' 'e' vInIDbe'lu'
I see in TKD that {Dung} and {bIng} are DIpmey (nouns). Although there is
discussion, even in TKD, that {-Daq N5) may be attached to the Object
Noun--not Locative, mind you-- after such Verbs as {ghoS}, I feel that the
above sentences make more sense without {-Daq}. Thus, I get: not Dung pum
'oH/vay' 'ach reH bIng pum.
Now, this brings up the actual subject of Marc's post. I have left {-lu'}
off the Verb entirely!!! I have suggested another rather indefinite subject
{'oH} or {vay'}.
peHruS