[tlhIngan Hol] When better is missing go with preferable

[mayqel qunenoS]

lieven,

I see your point and I agree with you. There is a definite difference
between the words {QaQ} and {qaq}.

The question is : Is this difference important ? And the answer
(according to my opinion) would be "it depends on the context".

Surely there are numerous cases, where the use of {QaQ} through the
"traditional" law'/puS construction would be the best way to go ; and
of course there would be other cases as well where the use of a simple
{qaq} would be correct too.

All in all (if I understand this american phrase correctly), I believe
{qaq} is a beautiful alternative to have, in our linguistic arsenal.

And an irrelevant question :
reH lugh'eghmoH google mail ! chay' 'e' vImev ?

qunnoq


On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Lieven <levinius at gmx.de> wrote:
> Am 23.08.2016 um 08:02 schrieb mayqel qunenoS:
>>
>> However, if I was writing a review comparing two phones, and at the
>> end of the comparison came to an overall conclusion, then I would say
>> something like "overall this phone is better".
>>
>> And if I was writing in klingon, then I would say "this phone is
>> preferable".
>
>
> I'm beginning to understand now. And there still is a great difference
> between "better" and "preferable", which I can explain on this example very
> well:
>
> The iPhone YZ is "better", because it is larger, faster, bigger, has more
> memory, higher quality and so one.
>
> But the Samsung XY is "preferable", because it is able to run the {boQwI'}
> app.
>
> chaq iPhone QaQ law', Hoch QaQ puS. 'ach qaqtaH Samsung, boQwI' nIqHom
> lo'laHmo'.
>
>
> --
> Lieven L. Litaer
> aka Quvar valer 'utlh
> Grammarian of the KLI
> http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher
> http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/BoQwI
>
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org