tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jan 20 02:21:19 2003
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: "to be" and plurals
>From: "DloraH" <[email protected]>
>> Maori chaH 'op no'Daj'e'.
SuStel:
>Maori ghaH 'op no'Daj'e'
>
>but that seems a bit ridiculous, at least to my linguistic biases.
Hm, weird. In english this would probably not sound so strange:
"Most of his family IS maori"
"Some of his ancestors IS maori"
(btw, what's maori?)
What is strange for me is the usage of {ghaH} instead of {'oH}. I know that {no'} can speak, but when one
talks about "some", I start to think about this like "IT, the group of people from your ancestors" = {'op
no'Daj}, ...
... and other confusing thoughts come into my mind, so I would this is one of these wierd grammar rules we
have to accept, or we need to wait for some additions from Maltz. He certainly didn't think about this when
he told us about those rules.
Other question:
Does the pronoun refer to {'op} or to {no'Daj} or even {'op no'Daj}?
{nuqDaq 'oH cha'e'}
"where is it, the torpedoes?"
Sounds weird, but to a klingon this might be perfect.
Quvar.
DIDabe'lu'ba'; DIDataHbe'!