[tlhIngan Hol] law' puS construction with nouns bearing suffixes

Jackson Bradley j.monroe.bradley at gmail.com
Thu Jul 2 16:32:46 PDT 2020


*resign *'oS *paj*.

*pav* DaghItlh 'e' DaHech 'e' vIHar.

Le jeu. 2 juill. 2020, à 18 h 02, Alan Anderson <qunchuy at alcaco.net> a
écrit :

> On Jul 2, 2020, at 8:41 AM, mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > During battle, an officer sees on the screen something which is surely
> > an armed ship closing in at warp 3 and something else which seems to
> > be a ship which is more heavily armed closing in at warp 7.
> >
> > Is there a reason why we couldn't say the following ?
> >
> > DujHey Qob law' Dujna' Qob puS
> > the apparent ship is more dangerous than the definite ship
>
> I can’t think of a reason why that would be controversial. Canon provides
> plenty of examples of noun suffixes on nouns, including nouns in
> comparative constructions.
>
> [end of grammatical advice; start of editorial comment]
>
> In this situation, however, I would use a different verb: {paj} “be
> urgent”. Until its status as a heavily-armed ship is confirmed, its threat
> level is unknown. It just requires more immediate attention.
>
> — ghunchu'wI'
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20200702/64e011bf/attachment.html>


More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list