tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Feb 20 22:52:19 2000
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC -- SuvwI'pu' Hol
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: KLBC -- SuvwI'pu' Hol
- Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 01:51:58 EST
In a message dated 2/21/2000 12:37:15 AM Central Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:
I hesitate to throw too much fuel onto the fires of discussion. In Klingon
for the Galactic Traveler we have the sentence <<vaj Duj chIj>> and a long
explanation about why the word <<vaj>> is more appropriate than the word
<<SuvwI'>>. I wonder how you all feel about the parallel I am thinking about
here.
Maybe I am completely wrong. <<SuvwI' Hol>> does not only mean "The language
of the particular warrior," feasibly it could cover the broader meaning.
Xardana
<< > SuvwI'pu' Hol -- Warriors' Language?
>
> My thinking here should be obvious <g>.
This is correct. However, the plural suffix <-pu'>, like the other plural
suffixes, is almost always optional. When used before <Hol> to talk about
language names, Okrand has always left it off, and I would suggest you do
the same here, winding up with just <SuvwI' Hol>.
pagh
Beginners' Grammarian >>