tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Dec 02 07:08:40 2009

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: Numbers with pronouns

ghunchu'wI' 'utlh (

On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 8:17 AM, Seruq <> wrote:
> jIQub vaj jIH.
> It's not canon.

It's pretty much anti-canon.  The existence of the verb {taH} "go on,
endure, continue" (and the real-world context which created it) is a
very strong indication that one does not use pronouns to mean "to be"
in the sense of "to exist".

> I suppose it could be labelled as poetic license.  But how would you do that
> sentence?

(SuStel does it exactly the way you did.  I'll let him explain why.)

Some have argued that {jIQub} is enough, as it automatically implies
that I am a real entity, but that's kind of a cop-out.  I'd probably
try to be explicit and say {jIQubmo' jIngebbe'ba'}.

-- ghunchu'wI'

Back to archive top level