tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jun 19 06:29:50 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: KLBC: compound words
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: KLBC: compound words
- Date: Thu, 19 Jun 97 13:01:38 UT
jatlh ghunchuwI':]
> ja' SuStel:
> >qep'a' loSDIchDaq jIqawpu'DI'
> >As soon as I have arrived at qep'a' loSDIch.
>
> Do we have any clearcut evidence that numbers with {-DIch} have the Type 5
> noun suffix transferred to them as if they were adjectival verbs? I often
> go quite far out of my way to try to avoid the issue. When I *do* wind up
> saying something like this, it does "feel" right to move the {-Daq} to the
> number word, but I think it's somewhat unknown territory.
Yes, we do have evidence. In Okrand's letter to me on the MSN Okrand Forum,
he says
qep'a' wejDIchDaq jatlhtaH tlhIngan Hol HaDwI'pu'.
Now, whether he considers {qep'a' wejDIch} to be a proper noun phrase or a
normal noun phrase meaning "third great meeting" (it's kinda both), I don't
know. But I have no problem in using {-Daq} on the ordinal in a {qep'a'}
name.
Then again, this is the letter which contained {tIv'egh} . . .
--
SuStel
Beginners' Grammarian
Stardate 97466.2