tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jun 26 11:41:26 2012
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] petaQ!
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 1:51 PM, David Trimboli <[email protected]> wrote:
> A footnote in the paq'batlh (pp. 70–1) claims that {petaQ} is derived from
> {taQ} "be weird" with the plural imperative prefix {pe-}, and that it means
> "something like 'weirdo.'"
>
> Do we know whether Okrand had any input on grammatical footnotes that are
> not derived from outside references? Is this derivation "canonical"?
Already discussed briefly on the list last year:
http://stodi.lojban.org/~clsn/webarchives/2011/November/msg00412.html
In short, don't put much stock in the authority of the footnotes.
-- ghunchu'wI'
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
[email protected]
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol