[tlhIngan Hol] Beginner's text and questions

SuStel sustel at trimboli.name
Tue Aug 24 18:44:22 PDT 2021

On 8/24/2021 9:18 PM, Will Martin wrote:
> I thought I remembered initial examples of lutu’lu’ and later examples 
> of tu’lu’ later where lutu’lu’ would have been called for, and when 
> that was pointed out, it just became tu’lu’ by convention, but it’s a 
> very old memory, and I’m not one of the wizards of canon.

I don't think *lutu'lu'* had been used in a canonical sentence, but 
Okrand has addressed it.

First, after qep'a' loSDIch, ghunchu'wI' reported that "Robyn Stewart's 
idea of *lutu'lu'* as the Klingon version of /whom/ got a nod and an 
explicit lack of contradiction [from Okrand]. *naDev tlhInganpu' 
lutu'lu'* is grammatical, but the *lu-* is more often left off." (Voragh 
sent this to the list 12 July 1998.)

In 2014, Okrand gave us most of the rest of the information we needed. 
See the message here: http://klingon.wiki/En/ThereIs . Instead of 
/who/whom,/ he compares *tu'lu'* without *lu-* to /there's/ referring to 
plural things that are there. This seems to me a closer comparison, 
since most people would not think your speech stilted if you say /there 
are things/ instead of /there's things./

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20210824/deae707b/attachment-0002.htm>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list