tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Feb 02 13:49:27 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: loDpu'
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: loDpu'
- Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 21:45:21 -0500
naDev law' loDpu'. loD law' nIv be' law' QIv.
The second sentence is the amazing one. It means "There are more men than
women."
The sentence uses the {law'/puS} construction.
HOWEVER, the verb of quality being compared is {law'} itself, which means
it'll be {loD law' law' be' law' puS}, a somewhat amusing, but completely
grammatical and understandable, construction.
HOWEVER, instead of using {law'/puS}, it uses slang, where {law'} and {puS}
are sometimes substituted for by paired verbs of quality. These pairs must
have opposite meanings, and one must obviously be "better" than another, to
put it in the {law'} spot. Here, we have {nIv} being substituted for {law'}
and {QIv} being substituted for {puS}. The sentence now takes on a slangy
feel. Think of "There be more men than women," or something like that.
HOWEVER, the particular verbs chosen to substitute, {nIv} and {QIv}, means
"superior" and "inferior," which has much to do, I think, with the
particular topic under discussion. Though they're only grammatical tools,
they're also providing a particular flavor, a mood for the sentence to exist
in.
FURTHERMORE, the verbs {nIv} and {QIv} rhyme, enhancing (I think) the slang
effect and the mood of the whole sentence!
All in all, pretty amazing!
SuStel
Stardate 99088.6
-----Original Message-----
From: K'ryntes <[email protected]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
Date: Sunday, January 31, 1999 7:30 PM
Subject: Re: loDpu'
>Will you explain it to me? I got the jist of it but I don't understand
>the construction.
>
>K'ryntes
>
>David Trimboli wrote:
>
>> Wow! That's an amazing sentence!
>>
>> SuStel
>> Stardate 99084.7
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>
>> To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
>> Date: Friday, January 29, 1999 9:21 AM
>> Subject: Re: loDpu'
>>
>> >naDev law' loDpu'. loD law' nIv be' law' QIv.
>
>
>
>