[tlhIngan Hol] {ghIq} {ngugh} and time adverbs with time stamps

mayqel qunen'oS mihkoun at gmail.com
Tue Nov 2 03:55:59 PDT 2021

ghunchu'wI', I suggest you read this mail *very* carefully until the
end, because at the end there's a wonderful, truly wonderful

> Let me ask you something; how many times in the past haven't we used
> in this list the  "proprietary terms" of {-meH}'ed and {-bogh}'ed
> nouns?
> How many times? We haven't used those terms essentially *every* time.
> Simplifying to get rid of the odd negation, we have never used those terms.
> I found exactly one older example of someone saying "-meH'ed the wrong verb"
> and two of "-bogh'ed verb" in the list archives. Both of them are explicitly referring to verbs,
> not nouns. There are also mentions of things like "Type 5'd nouns", but those are talking
> about syntactic marker suffixes which *do* go on nouns.

Are you sure about that? Wanna bet?


All of the above are the initial posts of threads where the term
{-meH}'ed nouns is used. Perhaps I can't count so well, but I think
that the number of the above threads is more than 0.

But I know what you'll say.. You'll say that in all those threads, it
was me the one who was mainly using this term. Yeah, so? Why didn't
then anyone object? Why didn't then someone say "hey, don't use that
term, it's wrong"?

I'll tell you why no one objected, ghunchu'wI'. Or better yet, let
voragh tell you.

On January 21 2016, I had sent a mail to this list, with the title
"why klingon is perfect". On that thread voragh quoted Qov, then he
quoted me, and then he wrote something which you should read,

***** thread excerpt starts *****

Qov :
>> There is one use of {-meH} that isn't
>> completely covered in TKD.  As well as marking an entire clause that
>> precedes the main clause and states the purpose of the main clause, a
>> verb with {-meH} can mark just a noun, and give the purpose of that
>> noun.

Cpt qunnoq:
> vIparHa' ! vIparHa'qu' !
> I like this ! I like this a lot !
> yabwIjDaq {-'e'} mollu'DI' wIja'chuqnISbej..
> as soon as the {-'e'} sinks in my mind, we definitely need to discuss
> this..[]

Until then, here are some known examples - a few used in sentences -
of what some call "{-meH}ed nouns" to ponder...

QongmeH Duj
sleeper ship


ngongmeH Duj
[experimental ship, prototype vessel] S33


qa'meH vIttlhegh replacement proverb


chenmoHlu'meH Daq
construction site KBoP

***** thread excerpt ends *****

What did voragh say, ghunchu'wI'? He said "of what some call "{-meH}ed
nouns". voragh, ghunchu'wI'; voragh.. Not me.. voragh.

Then, on January 27 2016, I sent a letter to this list with the title
of "{-meH}ed nouns", where I started by writing "I'm not labeling this
as KLBC, since this is a continuation of a
previous mail, in which the subject of {-meH}ed nouns came up".

And this the earliest mail I've found, where I used the term {meH}'ed
nouns. No one ever complained because voragh, by writing "of what some
call '{-meH}ed nouns'", revealed that this term was already in use
before I started using it myself.

And even if there *was* a mail dating before voragh's post where I
wrote "{-meH}ed nouns", then again this wouldn't change anything
because voragh wrote "of what some call"; plural.

Sadly the relevant threads aren't in the archives. The archives listed
here: "https://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/2015/index.php" end on October
2015, and the archives listed here:
"http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/" start on June

But if anyone falls so despicably low as to even suggest that I made
this up, then lieven can create a page at the wiki, and I'll upload
there the relevant pdf's.

So, ghunchu'wI', next time check your sources better.

Ζεὺς ἦν, Ζεὺς ἐστίν, Ζεὺς ἔσσεται· ὦ μεγάλε Ζεῦ

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list