Re: Terrorist - HighwI'

["David Trimboli" <SuStel@hotmail.com>]

From: "Stephan Schneider" <sts@stephan-schneider.net>
> >ram ngoQ.  SuvwI'vamvaD ponglu'meH QaQlaw' <ghobmeH ghIjwI'>.
>
> SuvwI'vamvaD - for this warrior
> ponglu'meH - in order to be called
> QaQlaw' - apparently good
> <> - terrorist
>
> *an apparently good terrorist in order to be called for this warrior.*
>
> i cannot parse this frase better. do you mean that these terrorists
> want be called warriors, and that's why they wage a war?

The verb /pong/ has been used by Okrand, in such a way as to suggest that
the object of /pong/ is the name, not the thing that the name is applied to.
(Not that it might not also include that, but I don't know.)  The example is
/'oHvaD juHqo' ponglu'/ "It is called the homeworld."  The thing which
"receives" the name is the beneficiary, and thus takes /-vaD/.

I used this pattern for that sentence:

"For naming these warriors, /ghobmeH ghIjwI'/ seems to be good."

Though now that I think about it again, shouldn't it be /ghobbogh ghIjwI'/
"scarers who make war"?

I also seem to have fallen into the /-meH/ trap again, though: the phrase
isn't good in order to name warriors; that's not the purpose of its being
good.  Maybe

SuvwI'vamvaD ponglu'chugh, QaQlaw' <ghobbogh ghIjwI'>.

SuStel
Stardate 2518.1