tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Mar 01 12:01:54 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: chuv

Tad Stauffer ([email protected])

• From: Tad Stauffer <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: chuv
• Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 15:02:13 -0500
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
• References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>

At 11:33 AM 3/1/2004 -0800, ...Paul wrote:

>Now, admittedly, /chen/ does already exist in the dictionary as a verb,
>whereas /chuv/ does not exist as a noun...
>
>But the corrolary would be, what if I wanted to use /chuvmey/ with a Type
>1 noun suffix?  Would it be */chuvmey'a'/ or */chuv'a'mey/ ?  This is
>where this kind of oddity becomes problematic.

I believe that this exact question came up at a qep'a' when Captain Krankor 
presented his song {'Iv maH} for the first time. The song includes the line 
{*chuvmeyoy DImaS}, but some people asked whether {*chuvoymey} would be 
more grammatically correct or not. At this point, I don't think we know if 
one is more correct than the other, but at least when you're singing {'Iv 
maH}, *{chuvmeyoy} is the version used. :-)

- taD

• References:
  • Re: chuv
    • From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
  • chuv
    • From: [email protected]
  • Re: chuv
    • From: "...Paul" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Klingon Language Highlights
• Next by Date: Re: Klingon WOTD: lIghon (n)
• Previous by thread: Re: chuv
• Next by thread: Re: chuv
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level