tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jun 28 12:33:58 2007
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: TUNGUSKA mupmeH Daq tu'lu''a'?
>Voragh:
> > TUNGUSKA mupmeH Daq tu'lu''a'?
> > Tunguska impact crater found?
ghunchu'wI':
>qatlh <-meH> Dalo'? meq ghoQ joq ghaj'a' chunDab?
ghobe', ghajbe'ba' chunDab.
> > I suppose I could go with a relative clause:
> >
> > Daq'e' muppu'bogh chunDab
> > the site that the meteor struck/impacted>
> >
> > Daq muppu'bogh chunDab'e'
> > the meteor that struck/impacted the site
> >
> > Of these, I still prefer my first attempt: {mupmeH Daq} "impact
> site". Or
> > should this be {muplu'meH Daq}? (Using {-meH} and {-lu'} always
> confuses me!)
I coined *{mupmeH Daq} "impact site" on the model of {chenmoHlu'meH Daq}
"construction site" (KBoP) - "site for the purpose of something being
constructed (by someone)". But you're right: it's not the same thing as
there's no actor. I was a bit leery, but I had previously coined *{laQmeH
Daq} "launch site", *{SaqmeH Daq} "landing site} and *{SaqHa'meH Daq}
"crash site " for my notes, so I may have been led astray.
> > Suggestions for "crater"?
>
> chunDab QIH
> chalmupwI' gho
>
>'ach naDev Qaplaw' <ngeng taQ>. :-P
--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons