tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Dec 05 06:26:57 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: adverb suffixes???
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: adverb suffixes???
- Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 09:26:39 EST
jatlh Clayton:
>nItebchoH veng.
jang mark:
>This sentence no verb. If you mean "the city became alone", that would be
>"mobchoH veng", whatever that means.
LOL. Actually, {nItebchoH veng} means, "The cities fill you." ({nItebchoH} = {
nI-} + {teb} + {-choH}).
jatlh Clayton:
>qenba' jImej.
ghel mark:
>What does this mean that {qen jImejba'} doesn't?
qenba' jImej. I fled, and that fleeing was obviously recent.
qen jImejba'. Recently, I obviously fled.
In English, they would probably both be translated as "I obviously fled
recently," but there is a difference, qar'a'?
Note that I do not necessarily agree with the use of type 6 suffixes on
adverbs; I'm merely making a point.
jatlh Clayton:
>QItqu' yIt.
jang mark:
>Emphasizing the adverbs does make a certain amount of sense; {QIt yItqu'}
>doesn't seem to have quite the same meaning as what you have above. But we
>have no evidence that it can be done in Klingon.
Personally, I like the use of rovers on adverbs...but I won't use them unless
such usage becomes canonical.
- DujHoD