tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Mar 18 15:50:32 2015

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: [Tlhingan-hol] A long word

Anthony Appleyard ( [KLI Member]

I had to keep the description very short as a grammatical term: compare e.g. when learning Russian the distinction between animate and inanimate nouns.

----Original message----
From :
Date : 18/03/2015 - 17:10 (GMTST)
To :
Subject : Re: [Tlhingan-hol] A long word

On 3/18/2015 12:28 PM, Alan Anderson wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Anthony Appleyard
> <> wrote:
>> SuchchuqnISqa'moHlaHlaw'taHneSghachHommeyqoqrajmo'
>> V:visit VS1:each_other VS2:need VS3:[do_again|resume] VS4:cause VS5:be_able
>> VS6:apparently VS7:continuous VS8:honorific VS9:-ation* NS1:diminutive
>> NS2:pl_gen NS3:so_called NS4:your_pl_nonsentient NS5:due_to
> I have a semi-tangential nitpick. What are you using that analyzes
> {-raj} as "your_pl_nonsentient"? The {-ra'} vs. {-raj} distinction is
> based on ability to use language, not ability to experience
> sensations.

He is probably thinking of the common science-fiction usage; see 
<>, which even 
includes a Star Trek example.

It's still not correct, but even the definition "capable of using 
language" is subject to exceptions.


Tlhingan-hol mailing list

Tlhingan-hol mailing list

Back to archive top level