[tlhIngan Hol] Why not law'wI'pu' ?

Steven Boozer sboozer at uchicago.edu
Thu Feb 21 11:12:54 PST 2019


OTOH I can see {law’wI’pu’} “the many” -- using the {-pu’} plural suffix – for the Marxist jargon “the masses”.

--
Voragh

From: SuStel

On 2/21/2019 1:37 PM, Ed Bailey wrote:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 12:55 PM SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name<mailto:sustel at trimboli.name>> wrote:

law' means be many, so law'wI' means one who is many...
The rigidity of this translation is what makes it nonsensical. For anything countable, the meaning of law' makes law'wI' inherently plural. It could be translated as "the many," just as qanwI' can be translated "the old."

Exactly what I said: "yeah, but you get it anyway."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190221/5af28a1a/attachment-0002.htm>


More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list