tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon May 26 19:04:58 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: law'/puS
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: law'/puS
- Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 22:05:25 -0400 ()
- Priority: NORMAL
On Sun, 25 May 1997 23:55:52 -0700 (PDT) Alan Anderson
<[email protected]> wrote:
> tlhob qoror:
> > Is it possible to put Type 9 verb suffixes in law' and puS in their
> >copulative formation?
>
> I assume you mean their *comparitive* formation. I'd have to say no.
> They aren't being used quite like your average Klingon verb when they
> provide the framework for the {A Q law' B Q puS} formula. It's almost
> as if they're being used adjectivally, which would automatically rule
> out non-rover suffixes anyway.
>
> What do you want to say? In most cases, I'd imagine breaking it into
> one comparitive sentence followed by a sentence with an appropriate verb
> such as {qaS} or {teH} in a subordinate clause could do what you want.
>
> Qa' 'ugh law' ghaH 'ugh puS. teHchugh ngoDvetlh ghaH wImeQbej!
Just for another casting, assuming the affirmative is likely:
Qa' 'ugh law' ghaH 'ugh puS, qar'a'? vaj wImeQbej! vajHa'
maqelqa'. [I'm assuming {vajHa'} works for "else". DaparHa''a'?]
> -- ghunchu'wI'
charghwI'