tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Mar 13 21:25:39 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Time (Out)

SuStel writes:
>About {SoH 'Iv} . . . isn't there a funny problem with subject and object
>sometimes switching places when using the English verb "to be" in a statement
>of equivalancy?  I don't know much about it, but if I'm right, then perhaps
>this either (1) confused Okrand, or (2) made him decide that something
>similar happens in Klingon.

I certainly hope #2 is not the case.  I find tlhIngan Hol's lack of a simple
verb meaning "to be" to be [:-)] one of its most fascinating features, and I
am loath to accept what I feel to be dilutions of this facet of the language.

Case #1 is possible, but {SoH 'Iv} is still easily explained by permitting
{'Iv} to act as a pronoun.  If he *did* err originally, he could cover his
....tracks with this explanation.  It doesn't appear to do damage to other
grammar.

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

Back to archive top level