tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Dec 19 06:58:25 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: KLBC mu'ghomHomwIj vIlo'be'



According to Robyn Stewart:
... 
> Actually, I don't like {SIS muD} much.  I'm with charghwI' on 
> {SISlu'}.  I'd accept {SIS}, but when the pronoun {'oH} is stated, I 
> want to know its antecedent.

I don't remember that I said this, but seeing it now, I
definitely like it.

> >>...fortunately it's warm in my house.
> >[Do' juHwIjDaq tuj Hat] [...the temperature is hot...] lugh'a'?
> >[Hat]-noun ['oH]-pronoun (which can replace nouns)
> >[Do' juHwIjDaq tuj 'oH] lugh'a'?
> >drop the redundant ['oH] brings us back to 
> >Do' juHwIjDaq tuj.
> 
> Did I bite at {Do' juHwIjDaq tuj}?  I don't mind it now.

I'd just say {Do' tuj juHwIj.} It is simpler.

> I believe that there is a right way to speak about 
> weather conditions.  I don't believe it is with a floating and 
> never-quite-identified "it" the way English does.  You do, and you 
> don't think the "it" is unidentified.  We disagree.  I can live with 
> it.
 
I'm with Qov on this one. And if you don't want to specify what
is raining or what is warm, {-lu'} is the suffix which
expresses the unspecified subject. That is what it is for.

charghwI'


Back to archive top level