tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Mar 29 20:16:05 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC&KBTP, Biblical translation
- From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC&KBTP, Biblical translation
- Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 23:16:02 -0500 (EST)
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]> (message fromMarian Schwartz on Thu, 27 Mar 1997 05:07:42 -0800 (PST))
>Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 05:07:42 -0800 (PST)
>From: Marian Schwartz <[email protected]>
>
>ghItlh charghwI'
>>Remember, "-vIS" needs "-taH"; they go together like a horse and carriage.
>I tend to think of "-taHvIS" as a *single* suffix, there's no suffix
>"-vIS". This is not a perfect way of looking at it, since you do have
>"-taHneSvIS" and "-taHQo'vIS", but those are rare.<
Actually, *I* said that.
>Do you think you could say "-lI'vIS?" It does say in TKD that at is *always*
>used with "-taH," but common sense says that there shouldn't be anything *wrong*
>with "-lI'vIS." Still, with the direct words of TKD, I won't try it, but maybe
>later we'll get something using it. --qoror
It's been asked quite a few times before. The answer is that TKD rather
specifically sys -taH, and *NOT* -lI', precedes -vIS. Lots of things that
are logical don't show up in languages, including in Klingon.
~mark