tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Mar 14 09:41:13 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: De'wI' mu'mey
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Date: Thu, 13 Mar 1997 22:20:28 -0800 (PST)
>From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
>
>jatlh voqHa'wI':
>
>> > Who knows? I doubt that Klingons ever had Mac/PC wars either.
>>
>> qaQochbe' [<-- lughchu''a' mu'tlheghvam?]
>
>lughbe'law'.
>
>"I agree you." Why is it so important to specify me in saying you agree? (Or
>rather, that you don't disagree.) All you need to say is {jIQochbe'} "I
>agree." Obviously, you're agreeing with what we're talking about.
FWIW, I am not dead against "qaQochbe'" for "I agree with you." There's a
continuum of opinions, I think, with SuStel near one end (the more
conservative and rigid side wrt assignments of objects of verbs) and peHruS
near the other (more permissive). I find myself definitely not in
agreement with peHruS on many matters, but also not with SuStel, though I
suspect I'm a bit closer to him.
Trouble is, transitivity is one of the least-clarified issues in tlhIngan
Hol.
~mark
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface
iQB1AwUBMymNtcppGeTJXWZ9AQHuMAL/eevgMdQDPx/3TsFEZo3ZK5BTbaHnZHaa
CkRYlT/8hPt+u5TGHeobvgjIKUTgq2ZpMeZD1fUcTFAnrCN5vhgrXSHQ4UlgHP5m
SDPrG/sLaYOXi+gGLJM5BpqO0+vtnw0A
=TajZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----