tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jul 22 16:26:01 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: lutu'lu' = whom (was {vegh})
- From: Terrence Donnelly <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: lutu'lu' = whom (was {vegh})
- Date: Tue, 22 Jul 1997 17:21:50 -0500
At 09:54 AM 7/22/97 -0700, charghwI' wrote:
>According to Terrence Donnelly:
>..
>> Maybe I'm just being stupid, but how does {lutu'lu'} translate as "whom"?
All
>> I can get out of it is "They are found/observed". {naDev tlhInganpu'
lutu'lu'}
>> means "There are Klingons here", right? Could you use it in a sentence with
>> the "whom" meaning?
>
>That was not explained very well. {lutu'lu'} does NOT translate
>as "whom" in any way at all. It is just that in English, most
>people use the word "who" when formally they should be using
>"whom", much like most Klingons use the word {tu'lu'} when they
>should be using {lutu'lu'}.
>
>In other words, the more formally correct sentence is:
>
>{tlhInganpu' lutu'lu'}
>
>though most Klingons most of the time would say:
>
>{tlhInganpu' tu'lu'}
>
>Is this clearer?
>
DaH jIyajchu'.
>charghwI'
>
-- ter'eS
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/2711