tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Dec 08 13:35:12 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Fw: walls
- From: Marc Ruehlaender <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Fw: walls
- Date: Tue, 08 Dec 1998 15:34:55 CST
- In-reply-to: Your message of Tue, 08 Dec 1998 13:24:59 -0800
jItlhob:
> > should we say {qama' cha' raQ} for "two prisoner camps"?
> > I didn't think so...
>
jang charghwI':
> I would have thought so. As {cha' qama' raQ}, it would mean "the
> camp of two prisoners" or "two prisoners' camp". As {qama' cha'
> raQ} it means either "the two camps of prisoners" or "the
> prisoners' two camps", both of which make good sense.
>
hmmm... interpreting N-N as a unit, I would have said
{cha' qama' raQ} for both "(two-prisoner)-camp(s)" and
"two prisoner-camps" and let context sort it out.
{qama' cha' raQ} might (besides "prisoners' two camps")
mean "prisoner #2's camp", so this isn't unambiguous either.
Do I have to believe you are right or do we have canon either way?
Marc Ruehlaender
aka HomDoq
[email protected]