tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Apr 18 06:10:39 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: SopDaq
According to [email protected]:
>
> In a message dated 97-04-11 22:37:05 EDT, SuStel writes:
>
> << hat's because it's a noun compound, and was fairly obvious in the
> accompanying context.
>
> > We know that {QongDaq} is canon for "bed."
>
> That's right. We know that because *Okrand* told us. >>
>
> This implies that {Qong} is a Noun, which I cannot find glossed anywhere.
> So, I suppose it is a Noun for which we do not have a translation.
>
NO! NO! A THOUSAND TIMES NO! How many times do we have to
explain that QongDaq is a noun because Okrand says it is a noun
and Qong is NOT a noun UNTIL Okrand says it is a noun? Will
this ever sink in? QongDaq is not a noun plus the locative
suffix. It is not a compound noun formed with the noun for
"place". QongDaq is a two syllable noun meaning bed. PERIOD.
That is ALL that it is. Attempts to analyze it based upon the
individual syllables is massively misguided. Yes, you can see
patterns in it. No, those patterns are not valid observations.
Klingon has irregularities, just like other languages. Deal
with it.
> peHruS
charghwI'