tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Aug 27 09:09:42 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

• Index by Date
• Index by Thread
• Index by Author

Re: 'Iv SoH vs. SoH 'Iv

...Paul ([email protected])

• From: "...Paul" <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: 'Iv SoH vs. SoH 'Iv
• Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:09:31 -0700 (PDT)
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
• References: <[email protected]>

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 [email protected] wrote:
> First and second person subjects require prefixes.  (First and second person
> *objects* require prefixes too, which is an argument against {'Iv} being a
> verb.)  So, to use {'Iv SoH}, we'd have to put a prefix on {'Iv}: {bI'Iv SoH}.
> But if we can do that, then we don't even need the {SoH}; we can just say
> "bI'Iv" (who are you?).  I don't think this is acceptable.

I get you, but this is only if you try to make /'Iv SoH/ out to use /'Iv/
as the pronoun-as-verb.  /'Iv SoH/, with /SoH/ as the verb is
categorically correct.

I think we're all in "violent agreement" here.  :)  We all prefer /'Iv
SoH/.

...Paul

 **        Have a question that reality just can't answer?        **
  ** Visit Project Galactic Guide http://www.galactic-guide.com/ **
                    The frogurt is also cursed.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: 'Iv SoH vs. SoH 'Iv
    • From: "Lieven L. Litaer" <[email protected]>

• References:
  • 'Iv SoH vs. SoH 'Iv
    • From: [email protected]

• Prev by Date: Re: Klingon WOTD: QI'lop (n)
• Next by Date: Re: {'Iv}
• Previous by thread: 'Iv SoH vs. SoH 'Iv
• Next by thread: Re: 'Iv SoH vs. SoH 'Iv
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level