tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri May 28 06:54:18 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: Possessive style

Eric Andeen ([email protected])

• From: "Eric Andeen" <[email protected]>
• Subject: RE: Possessive style
• Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 17:55:27 -0700
• Thread-index: AcRDeloaJEhECwVgQxOpEOTYptRDjQA0spgw
• Thread-topic: Possessive style

Jeremy:
>>> I have a stylistic question.  Should one use the possessive=20
>>> when the possession is obvious?

> SuStel is correct that I was not asking about whether leaving=20
> out an obvious possessive would be understood, but rather,=20
> would it sound odd?  But it's not canon I want to examine. =20
> It is common usage among earthly Klingon speakers.  Sure it=20
> would be great to have Okrand tell us what Klingons would=20
> consider good style, but there are much more important=20
> questions to answer first.  No, what I'm trying to ask is for=20
> some of the more fluent speakers to comment on their own=20
> personal style.  Do you think it sounds incomplete to leave=20
> off the possessive if the possession is obvious?  Or does it=20
> sound cumbersome or redundant to include it when it is=20
> already known?

DIvI' Hol 'oH HolwIj wa'DIch'e', 'ej DIp mojaq Segh loS vIqelDI', DIvI'
Hol rur tlhIngan Hol lo'meH mIwwIj motlh 'e' vItlhoj. roD jIjatlh
<nujlIj yIpoSmoH>, 'ej <nuj yIpoSmoH> jIjatlhbe'. mu'tlhegh cha'DIch
vIyajbej, 'ach vIQoyDI' Hujlaw'.

'ach DIvI' Hol jatlhwI' jIH. chay' pIm latlh Hol jatlhwI'pu'. loQ
*Spanish* Hol vIHaDta' 'ej loQ vIjatlhlaH, 'ach povHa'bej laHwIj.
*Spanish* Hol, latlh rurbogh Hol joq jatlhlaHchu'chugh latlh tlhIngan
Hol jatlhwI', chaq pIm lo'Daj. Quvar, bIqIm'a'? Holmey law' DajatlhlaH
'e' vISov, 'ej DIvI' Hol 'oHbe' HollIj wa'DIch. vuDlIj yIghaq!

pagh

• Prev by Date: Re: new/old vs. young/old
• Next by Date: Re: early/late
• Previous by thread: Re: Possessive style
• Next by thread: makes sense!
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level