tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Mar 10 14:40:34 2004
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: {Hov'a'} pagh {Hov'a'}be'
- From: "QeS lagh" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: {Hov'a'} pagh {Hov'a'}be'
- Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 08:39:53 +1000
- Bcc:
mujangpu' SuStel:
>We haven't DECIDED anything. Holtej pointed out that there is at least one
>case of an apparently productive compounding in canon, and I agree. I
>don't
>think compounding nouns is much more productive than that; I'm not of the
>opinion that you can compound any old nouns you like. Generally, in my
>opinion, compound nouns should be lexicalized words; non-lexicalized
>concepts should be expressed as noun-noun constructions.
qatlho'. cha' 'ay' DIpmey'e' chenmoHlu'pu'be'bogh Okrand DamuSlaw' 'e'
vISov.
I know that you're generally against this type of compounding; so am I, for
that matter (in large part because of your explanations of your position on
the subject). That's why I'm against using {pemHov} and {juHHov}. I was just
asking about the message that Holtej had sent, and your opinion *only* with
regard to that case, because I didn't see your reply.
>pagh wIwuqqu' rIntaH. *Okrand* mu'tlheghmeyDaq wa' rarbogh DIp
>chang'engHey
>'ej lI'law'bogh tu'lu'. jIQochbe'. DIpmey rarmoHghach lI' law' *Okrand*
>mu'tlhegh chenmoHmeH mIw lI' puS 'e' vIHarbe'. wa' mu' lumojlaH Hoch DIp
>latlh DIp je 'e' vIHarbe'. motlh mu'ghomDaq wa' mu' mojpu'bogh cha' DIp'e'
>tu'lu'law'. mu'ghomDaq qech tu'lu'be'chugh, tlhej'eghbogh cha' DIp
>lo'nISlu'.
luq; vaj wa' DoS wIqIp. <<cha' DIp chevlu'pu'bogh>> qaq law' <<wa' DIp
chenmoHlu'pu'bogh>> qaq puS 'e' vIHarqu'bej. DaH mo'wIj vI'ang:
wa' - tlhIngan mu'ghomna'Daq, cha' DIp boqchuqchu'ghach Del Okrand; <<DIp
DIp je mu'tlheghHom>> 'oH pongDaj'e'.
cha' - DIpmey luchenmoHlu'pu'bogh wIlo'chugh, mojaqmey lo'laHbe' DIp
wa'DIch. SachuHpu' - {tlhInganpu' juHqo'na' HovHey} "the apparent star of
the true Klingon homeworld". mu'tlheghvam wIjatlhlaHbe' DIp
chenmoHlu'pu'bogh wIlo'chugh.
>We don't have the power to decide things on this list. There's been a lot
>of proclaiming and deciding here recently anyway . . . .
'e' vISovbej. chaq qachuHnISqa': I meant to ask what you had decided *based
on the canon evidence*. Like you, I don't accept anything that's outside of
canon: not only words, but structures as well. The problem is working out
exactly how much canon tells us we CAN do. Maybe {wuq} wasn't the right word
for me to use; {wIv} is probably better.
>naDev mawuqqu'be'. 'ach qen naDev maqlu'taH 'ej wuqlu'taH . . . .
'e' vItulHa'. wuqlaH Okrand neH. ja'chuqtaHqu'ghach vImuSbe', 'ach
qechmey'e' lIngbe'bejbogh Okrand maqlu' 'e' vImuS.
Savan.
QeS lagh
_________________________________________________________________
Personalise your phone with chart ringtones and polyphonics. Go to
http://ringtones.com.au/ninemsn/control?page=/ninemsn/main.jsp