[tlhIngan Hol] Rendered fat

[Ed Bailey]

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 5:36 PM, David Holt <kenjutsuka at live.com> wrote:

> I have a project I'm working on and I would like to figure out the most
> efficient way to elicit the image of rendered fat as a thing.  Is {tlhag}
> the subject of {'Im} and thus {'Impu'wI'} might work?  Or is {tlhag} the
> object of {'Im} and thus we might have to go with the unwieldy {tlhagh
> 'Imlu'pu'bogh}?  What about {-wI'} with {-lu'} - {'Imlu'pu'wI'}?
>
> Jeremy
>
Oh, boy, the {-lu'} plus {-wI'} thing again! I so wish MO would finally
rule on this, since it's immediately obvious to some this combination
nominalizes the same way as "-ee" in "employee," but others regard the
construction as grammatical gibberish, and they seem to have convinced most
to avoid using it. (I can't help but suspect the difficulty with {-lu'}
plus {-wI'} has a lot to do with a programming background, since the
objection is often phrased as "I can't make that mean anything," which
sounds a lot like a compiler error to me.)

"Boil" can take an object or not, of course, but the online OED gives only
transitive definitions for "render":

"Melt down (fat) in order to clarify it.
*‘the fat was being cut up and rendered for lard’*
Process (the carcass of an animal) in order to extract proteins, fats, and
other usable parts.


*‘the rendered down remains of sheep’ "*
So I'd expect {tlhag} is the object of {'Im}. 'ej bIjatlhchugh
<'Imlu'pu'wI'>, vay' 'Imlu'pu'bogh 'oH 'e' SIbI' vIyaj.

~mIp'av
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20170217/f5ada95f/attachment-0016.htm>