tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Dec 18 00:42:05 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC Challenge: similar suffixes
- From: "Doneq" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC Challenge: similar suffixes
- Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 09:33:32 +0100
- Comments: Authenticated sender is <[email protected]>
- Priority: normal
ghItlh Robyn Stewart
> >> }pumpu' naghpu'.
> >> }Rocks have fallen.
> >>
> >> jatlhlaH'a' naghmeyvetlh?
> >
> >nuqjatlh? vIyajbe'.
>
> The suffix {-pu'} is used only to form the plural of nouns that use
> language, i.e. people. {pumpu' loDpu'} "the men have fallen" but
> {pumpu' naghmey} "the rocks have fallen. DaH Dayaj'a'?
HIja'.
>
> >> I'd read {muHaqmo' HaqwI'} as "because the surgeon
> >> performs/performed surgery on me" and use {muHaqlI'mo'} for "is
> >> performing" or "was performing." You're talking about this proces
> >> going on at the time at which the event, you're not being able to
> >> move, occurs.
> >
> >Yes, but the {-lI'} had to go in the other sentence :)
>
> You can have as many suffixes as needed on one verb or noun, as long
> as you don't have two suffixes of the same type. No need to ration
> your suffixes.
vISov. jIqID neH.
> >> Good comments. The {-pu'} is ok, but the {-lI'} i really hard to
> >> support there. I don't think the "busy" translation works as well
> >> here.
> >
> >Maybe I was doing it on purpose, because I don't like you :)
>
> qechvetlh vIqelbe'pu'.
qechvam vIqeltaHvIS mu'tlheghvam vIqonta'. :)
/Doneq
______
HIq DaSammeH tach yI'el