[tlhIngan Hol] {'e' qa'} "instead of" with the {qa'} bearing suffixes

SuStel sustel at trimboli.name
Fri Nov 19 06:33:31 PST 2021

On 11/19/2021 6:54 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
> De'vID:
>> Maybe it should be {pu' DIlo'chugh, maQap; yan DIlo' 'e' qa'}.
> I'm afraid I can't understand this. The way I read it is "If we use
> phasers we'll win, instead of using swords". Shouldn't there be a
> {-chugh} on the {yan DIlo'} too?

You're right: saying it De'vID's way seems to say we use phasers, and 
we'll win instead of using swords. I don't think either version works.

> SuStel:
>> Maybe this can be simplified using the common shortcuts like so:
>> pu' DIlo'chugh, maQap; yan qa'.
>> If we use phasers, we will succeed. It replaces swords.
>> I don't know whether this works in the more formal style, however.
> I can't understand this either. Could you please explain the reasons
> which make you have doubts as to whether this could work in the formal
> style?

I misspoke a bit. The *yan qa'* version isn't the informal style; it's 
just the version /instead/-ing a noun instead of a sentence.

But now I don't think this quite works either, for a reason similar to 
De'vID's. It seems to say /We win instead of swords, /whatever that means.

I just don't see a good way of making an instead-construction 
conditional. We either need to break it into multiple sentences or get 
word from on high about how to do it.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20211119/8a75a568/attachment-0003.htm>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list