tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Aug 30 13:28:28 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

2 more Okrandian backfits





	Here are two KGT disprovations of some subjects we were pretty sure of.
At least, the first one is.  Maybe not the second one.

	We always figured, I think, that "above me" or some such thing to be
"DungwIjDaq."  It was common sense: with a noun, you use the possessive
construction, so with a pronoun, given TKD page 52:

	"Pronouns are not used in possessive constructions in the way nouns are;
instead, the set of possessive noun suffixes is used."

	we use the possessive suffixes.
	I think we assumed that, because I saw the construction in Hamlet.
Ah-ah-ah!  KGT page 24:

	"A pronoun may be used instead of a noun: jIH 'em ("behind me" --
literally, "I area behind"), chaH bIng ("below them"-- literally, "them area
below."

	It goes on to say that it is indeed done the way we do sometimes, but
that's by the Sakrejians and we don't want to sound like them, do we?

	Also, I remember someone at the qep'a' on Friday (either the chuvmey
section or the Grammarians section) saying that he was going to say "jachjaj
'IwlIj" anyway.  Who was that?  Anyway, if you want to sound like a Sakrejian or
a No'hvadutian, be our guest!

Qapla'
qoror

Back to archive top level