tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jun 13 16:18:32 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
ja*
- From: Andrew Strader <[email protected]>
- Subject: ja*
- Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 21:17:13 +0000
- Organization: Decode
>In this specific case, though, there's another problem. Despite the
>definition
>gloss "tell", we know that <lut ja'be'lu'. lut jatlhlu'. nuv ja'lu'.>
Ah yes. You have a good point there. In the known canonical examples the
object of ja' (if it has one) is always an interlocutor. The direct object of
jatlh is always either a language or an utterance. Notable, however, is that
ja' also has the gloss "report", which is precisely what one does to a story
and not to a interlocutor. Anyway, that was my thot process on the matter,
but you may be right about ja', considering known canon.
--
Andrew Strader