tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Apr 22 05:24:16 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: family suffixes
- From: Marian Schwartz <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: family suffixes
- Date: 22 Apr 97 08:22:24 EDT
ghItlh mIqIraH
>jatlh ~mark:
>
>> Hmm. Can't say about this one. At least you didn't say "*nal", which
>> would have been more intuitive. BUT Okrand (in TKW, if I recall correctly)
>> tells us that -nal is a bound morpheme, which doesn't occur on its own.
>> NOTE: the previous sentence was straight out of my fuzzy memory: someone
>> please double-check.
>
>I also recall this, let me check... a quick scan of TKW turned up
>nothing, but I know its there somewhere. I just flipped through really
>fast looking for a bold-print {nal} and didn't find anything. However,
>I am absolutely positive that you quoted Okrand correctly, regardless of
>source.
I agree with you, but I just took a more comprehensive look for proverbs
regarding family, but there was nothing. It's probably not from TKW. Maybe
somewhere else though. (Maybe {-nI'} and {-nal} are like {-vI'} [occuring in
vatlhvI'.])
Qapla'
qprpr