tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Sep 03 20:23:54 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC - handle: <'uchmeHwI' > or <'uchmeHghach> ????
- From: [email protected] (HoD trI'Qal)
- Subject: Re: KLBC - handle: <'uchmeHwI' > or <'uchmeHghach> ????
- Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 23:24:48 -0400
At 01:40 AM 8/30/96 -0700, A.Appleyard wrote:
> Chet Braun <[email protected]> wrote;-
>> Trying to find a way of saying 'handle'. I think TKD says that you can't
>> turn a verb with a suffix, <'uchmeH> into a noun unless you use <-ghach>
>> suffix. So instead of <'uchmeHwI'>, which should mean "thing for the purpose
>> of holding", would <'uchmeHghach> convey the idea of a handle? Of course
>> they may already be a word for handle that I'm not aware of...
>
> {'uchmeHwI} and {'uchmeHghach} each have two class 9 verb suffixes, which is
>illegal. If they mean anything, they mean "thing for the purpose of being a
>holder" and "the condition of being for the purpose of holding". Best put on
>the list for Okrand that we need a word for "handle".
*A.Appleyard*vaD:
bIquvHa''eghmoHchu'qu'!
'ej jIH choquvHa'moHta' je!
jabbI'ID "Subject"Daq "KLBC" tu'lu'chugh, vaj DajanglaHpa', vIjang jIH!!!!!
*growls in her wrath*
DaH HochvaD bItlhIjnIS.
'ej choqaghqa'chugh, vaj bIHeghbejqu'... 'ach nom bIHeghbe'qu'!
SKI: Mr. Appleyard has commited the "Ultimate Sin", of answering a KLBC
post before I did--he has dishonoured both I and himself.
--tQ
---
HoD trI'Qal, tlhIngan wo' Duj lIy So' ra'wI'
Captain T'rkal, Commander IKV Hidden Comet
Klingon speaker and net junkie!
HaghtaHbogh tlhIngan yIvoqQo'! toH... qatlh HaghtaH Qanqor HoD???
monlI'bogh tlhInganbe' yIvoqQo'! SoHvaD monlI' trI'Qal...