tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Mar 23 15:42:31 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Using {law'/puS} (was Re: jIqontaH.)
- From: Zrajm C Akfohg <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Using {law'/puS} (was Re: jIqontaH.)
- Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 01:07:00 +0100
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
- Organization: Klingonska akademien.
On 22-Mar-99, Steven Boozer wrote:
> Voragh:
>> <ghot> lo' Okrand law' <nuv> lo' Okrand puS 'e' wISov neH.
>
> maHvatlh (Zrajm C Akfohg):
> : pab'a' mu'tlheghvam? vIyaj 'ach lughlaHbe''a'?
> : <A Q law' B Q puS> vIjatlh TKD (p.70).
> : nuqDaq Datu' mu'tlheghvam chut?
> : <O-V-S law' O-V-S puS> 'oH'a', chutlIj?
> You're right. I'm not sure whether using {law'/puS} like this is kosher,
> but you obviously understood it right away. I was trying to say: "We only
> know that Okrand uses {ghot} more than (Okrand uses) {nuv}".
HISlaH. Dajmo' mu'vam DachenmoHchu'. vIparHa'bej.
> We've seen Okrand use {law'/puS} for comparing things other than simple
> qualities ("Q"):
> QamvIS Hegh qaq law' torvIS yIn qaq puS
> Better to die on our feet than live on our knees. ST6
> "Dying while standing is preferable to living while kneeling." TKW
> (Note that this phrase seems to be an old, possibly {no' Hol}, quotation;
> the verbs would be {QamtaHvIS} and {tortaHvIS} in "modern" 24th century
> {ta' Hol}.)
[snipsnip]
> That being said, I wonder if these variants are grammatical:
> ?<ghot> lo' Okrand law' <nuv> lo' puS.
> Okrand uses {ghot} more than (he uses) {nuv}.
> ?<ghot> lo' Okrand law' latlh lo' puS.
> Okrand uses {ghot} more than (he uses) the other (one).
> ?<ghot> lo' Okrand law' Hoch lo' puS.
> Okrand uses {ghot} most (of all).
toH. jISovbe. 'IHbej. bIyajpu 'e' ngeD. mujlaHchu'be' qechvam.
/Greetz, Zrajm C
--
Zrajm C Akfohg www.come.to/dark Tel:018-500911 Beep:0740-145753
Uppsala, Sweden [email protected] ICQ:16769663 Open:0.00-24.00