tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri May 31 23:41:04 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Sound
- From: Manic Paranoid <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Sound
- Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 16:41:37 -1000
At 02:58 PM 5/31/96 -0700, you wrote:
> In a message dated 96-05-31 06:42:13 EDT, voqHa'wI' wrote:
nuqjatlh? nuq 'oH <EDT> jay?
Someone else wrote:
>>>Does anyone know the translation of 'sound (n)'?
>>>
>>>Suggestion: QuymoHwI' (Quy=to hear)
>>>(is moH allowed in a verb + wI' construction?)
I wrote:
>> I think you are looking for <Quylu'wI'>, or "That which is heard".
> Ick. {Qoy} = "hear," not {Quy}.
I think that the first thing to notice here is that =I= did not write {Quy},
I just saw the translation above and [rather stupidly] just copied it.
> Also, whenever we see a verb with {-wI'} on it, it is translated as "thing
> which is," or "thing which does," etc. ...
Which is -exactly- why I like my translation. Since {Qoylu'} means
"it is heard", I thought that {Qoylu'wI'} would make a nice "thing which is
heard".
> This is a good example of the problem of trying to use {-lu'} and {-wI'}
> together.
Problem? I don't see one! [fishing for responses - this goes in the grammar
files once I get around to it :] ]
voqHa'wI' -- aka for once thinking he may actually be -right- on something
-- aka but maybe not.
__________
/ ______ /
/ / / /___ ______ ______ ______
Daniel Noll / / / __ //___ // __ // ____/
[email protected] / / / / / /____/ // / / / \ \
[email protected] / /____ / / / // __ // /_/ /___\ \
http://brucehall29.anu.edu.au/ /______//_/ /_//_/ /_//_____//_____/