tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Oct 30 12:01:34 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC
ok, is {Sup} jump or not?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Quvar valer" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 7:50 AM
Subject: Re: KLBC
> wrote Tad Stauffer <[email protected]>:
>
> >Hmmmm... according to The Klingon Dictionary, {Sup} is listed as just the
> >verb "jump", with no further clarification about "in" or "over"
something.
> Right.
> So you can also just "jump" in place, up and down, without going
somewhere.
> (I don't want to imagine Klingons jumping around :-)
>
> >listed in the MSN Klingon language resources as "jump (to leap or go
> >over)", and Quvar probably modified his notes to reflect this.
> So this definition describes the verb "jump", not the verb {Sup}.
>
> >definitions from MSN were made up by the people who created the MSN
> >resources, and aren't official definitions from Marc Okrand.
> Really? I hope I don't have too many of these "non-canon" clarifications.
>
> >To be on the safe side, I'd suggest Gina rewrite "The boys jumped in the
> >lake" keeping the verb as (Sup) and subject as (loDHompu'), as above.
> I agree.
>
> >If you have any questions, I'm sure Quvar will be happy to explain
> >further or give some more examples. :-)
> Of sure!
>
> >- taD (former Beginners' Grammarian)
>
> Quvar
> Beginners' Grammarian
> ghojwI'pu'wI' vISaH
>
>