tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Mar 25 12:07:54 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: "tu'lu'" with plurals
- From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC: "tu'lu'" with plurals
- Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 15:07:55 -0500 (EST)
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]> (message fromMarian Schwartz on Tue, 25 Mar 1997 05:54:28 -0800 (PST))
>Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 05:54:28 -0800 (PST)
>From: Marian Schwartz <[email protected]>
>
>
>
> I have a question. When "tu'lu'" is used with plurals, shouldn't it be
>"lutu'lu'?" Or has it evolved into a relatively independent term? --qoror
Yes and no. By rights, it looks like it should be "lutu'lu'", and the
careful among us try to do it that way. However, although Okrand has never
said "tu'lu'" is fossilized, he seems to use it fairly consistently even
for plurals.
~mark