tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Sep 03 23:26:57 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: buy' ngop?
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: buy' ngop?
- Date: Thu, 4 Sep 97 05:48:42 UT
[email protected] on behalf of Terrence Donnelly wrote:
> >yoHbogh SuvwI' matlh
> >or
> >matlhbogh SuvwI' yoH
> >
>
> Actually, although I hope you are right, how did you arrive at this formula?
> Only the first two formations are listed in the book ("X N 'ej Y" and
> "X-bogh N 'ej Y-bogh"), I think. Is there canon to support the
> "X-bogh N Y" form?
Canon? There's no question that this works. Multiple verbs on a single noun
was questionable, but this is simply a noun phrase modified by a relative
clause.
SuvwI'
warrior
SuvwI' matlh
loyal warrior
yoHbogh SuvwI' matlh
loyal warrior who is brave
You want canon? I didn't have any canon in mind when I constructed these.
They just work according to the standard rules, no question. Let's see. Aha!
yIntaHbogh tlhIngan Soj tlhol jablu'DI' HIvqu'lu'.
Klingon food is best when served fresh and live. (SkyBox #S21)
I admit I have no idea what that {HIvqu'lu'} means here, but that's irrelevant
to the point. The point is that we have the phrase {yIntaHbogh tlhIngan Soj
tlhol} "fresh and live Klingon food."
I think you're focusing a little too much on formulae, and not enough on
saying what you mean according to the rules of grammar. I didn't think "Xbogh
N Y," I thought {SuvwI' matlh. *yoHbogh* SuvwI' matlh}
--
SuStel
Stardate 97676.2