tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jul 30 13:54:42 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: taghwI' qaD
- From: QuljIb@cs.com
- Subject: Re: taghwI' qaD
- Date: Fri, 30 Jul 1999 16:53:37 EDT
ghItlh pagh:
> wejmaH Soch Hu' *London*Daq *Ireland*Daq je vIleng.
> *London* veng Hoch vIleghlaHbe' 'ach HIq qachmey law' vISuch.
>
> tachmey Daqel'a'? HIq laSvarghmey Daqel'a'?
tachmey vIqel.
> > *Ireland*Daq waQpu' chal 'ej jajmey puS loQ SISpu'.
>
> <waQ> is a verb meaning "obstruct", so you would either have to say <chal
> luwaQ 'engmey> or use a different verb and say <HuvHa' chal>. I'm also not
> clear on why you used the perfective suffix <-pu'> here.
Duh!!! [sounds of forehead colliding with fist repeatedly as he recalls
"Hovmey Huv".]
Considering how Ireland is almost ALWAYS overcast, you're right I could have
left of the <-pu'>
> > SuDqu' puH! loSmaH SuDmey tu'lu'! tugh jIchegh 'e' vIneH.
>
> Same comment about <'e'> as before. Also, since <SuD> is a verb, the
> <SuDmey> bit is ungrammatical, but I suspect you knew that and did it
> anyway, which I don't have a problem with.
>
I suppose this is one of the few times when <-ghach> would be allowable? i.e.
{loSmaH SuDghachmey}?
quljIb