tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Nov 21 20:25:09 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: "The ship in which I fled"
- From: Qov <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: "The ship in which I fled"
- Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 20:25:07 -0800
At 06:50 97-11-21 -0800, qoror wrote:
}ghItlh ghunchu'wI'
}>Since {pa'Daq'e'} is not grammatical, this sentence does not work.
}
}Hmmmm[mmmmm]... It has always seemed to me that {-'e'} was inappropriately
}made as a Type 5 noun suffix. After all, the introductory part to the Type
}5 says that to indicate something other than subject or object, suffixes
}are used. But the examples for {-'e'} are for a subject, and then an
}object. (And the hideous grammatical error in one of the examples, {lujpu'
}jIH'e'}, shows that he might not have been thinking clearly when writing
}this part, but I won't base my argument on that.) Was this what Nick
}Nicholas was trying to get across in his article in the most recent HolQeD?
It's not THAT hideous. {lujpu' jIH'e'} is valid, although weird, as clipped
Klingon. Having stressed the jIH'e' so heavily I can see the jI- falling
off the verb. I 'm not saying Marc Okrand left it off on purpose, but it
can be covered.
-'e' *is* different from the other type-5's but it *is* a type-5 and we
wouldn't be speaking Klingon if we followed different rules.
Qov [email protected]
Beginners' Grammarian