tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Nov 17 20:36:58 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: verb suffixes in comparative clauses?; male animals
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: verb suffixes in comparative clauses?; male animals
- Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 23:38:45 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
- Priority: NORMAL
On Thu, 13 Nov 1997 02:29:02 -0800 (PST) "Anthony.Appleyard"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> "William H. Martin" <[email protected]> answered A.Appleyard:-
> > > "In my herd, kill and clean the male targh which is fattest": but in
> > > {... targh'e' pI' law' Hoch pI' pus ...}
> > I'd probably just use {pov}:
> > pI'bogh targh pov yIHoH.
> > I would not try to combine a comparative and a relative clause.
>
> Perhaps this time. But sometimes we do need a comparative in a relative
> clause.
No we don't. I'm sure the langauge will survive quite well
without it. Just use two sentences, like we do with "the ship in
which I fled". You are trying to extend both the comparative and
the relative clause beyond their capacity in the language. The
cost is far more than the benefit.
> Put this in the {OkrandvaD yu'ghachmey tetlh}?
Qo'.
> > > The noun {loD} is "male, man", but what is the adjective "male" of an
> > > animal? {loD 'oHbogh targh'e'}??
>
> > We simply don't know. This would likely work. We don't even know whether
> > Klingons CARE about the gender of animals. In terms of language, they barely
> > care about the gender of PEOPLE.
>
> But Klingon animal breeders MUST consider the gender of their animals,
> unless targs etc are hermaphrodite or parthenogenetic!
I don't think the jargon of breeders made it into KGT. Deal with
it.
charghwI'