tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jul 02 16:27:31 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: HolQeD chu'

From: "Tad Stauffer" <>
> 'a {'e' Hechlu'ba'} vIqonchugh, {Hechba' ghItlhbogh vay''e'} 'oS qar'a'
> mu'tlheghvam?
> i.e., {-meH} ghItlh matlh/Okrand/vay', 'ej {-moH} ghItlh 'e' Hech
> matlh/Okrand/vay'vam.
> rut {'e' X-lu'} qonpu' Okrand, qar'a'?

qar, rut ghItlhpu'.  'a chaq Qagh neH ghaH.  qaSbej Qaghmey.  pIj <lu->
ghItlh 'e' lIj Okrand; pIj <lu-> lulIj tlhIngan (hee!) vaj 'e' maq Okrand.

<'e' X-lu'> ghItlhlaHchugh vay', qatlh <net X> ghItlh neH?  poQnISbe'.

We all make the /'e' X-lu'/ mistake; it's a very easy one to make.  Okrand
has done it himself more than once.  I think it makes more sense to chalk
this up to "common mistakes" rather than to "perfectly acceptable."
Otherwise, there's no point at all to /net X/; why is it there?

TKD makes it clear when /net/ is used: "When the verb of the second sentence
has a third-person subject . . . , but the intended meansing is 'one' or
'someone,' rather than 'he,' 'she,' 'it,' or 'they,' /net/ is used instead
of /'e'/."  There are certainly exceptions, or at least recognizable
deviations, but it's probably beyond us to say flat-out that /'e' X-lu'/ is

Stardate 2502.0

Back to archive top level