[tlhIngan Hol] ja'chuq and jatlhchuq

[SuStel]

On 5/21/2020 7:31 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
> As far as the {jatlhchuq} is concerned, again I realize that there is
> no Ca'Non to support it, but if we *can* say {qajatlhpu' HIghoS}, then
> why couldn't we say too {majatlhchuqpu'..} Although, now that I'm
> thinking this over, I don't know whether we've actually seen any
> Ca'Non using the prefix trick with {jatlh}, so perhaps this all
> approach has been wrong from the start.

We have. The canonical word is *qajatlh.* 
http://klingonska.org/canon/search/?file=1997-06-29a-news.txt&q=qajatlh

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20200521/ae7a37a4/attachment-0015.htm>