[tlhIngan Hol] {'e' qa'} "instead of" with quotations

[janSIy .]

My own opinion, and not based on any specific canon or instruction, is that you should always try to use the {lu-} prefix when appropriate, including for {lutu'lu'}, but that you shouldn't worry about it if you forget it somewhere (even if it's a formal situation) and shouldn't bother to correct others when they leave it off.

janSIy


________________________________
From: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol-bounces at lists.kli.org> on behalf of luis.chaparro at web.de <luis.chaparro at web.de>
Sent: Thursday, October 7, 2021 9:03 AM
To: tlhingan-hol at kli.org <tlhingan-hol at kli.org>
Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] {'e' qa'} "instead of" with quotations

> This is one of those cases of Okrand giving us what appears to be a fixed expression that doesn't follow the rules. I'm not sure it makes sense to ask what the subject of qa' is here.

Ok, thank you! I guess that's similar to what happens with the expression *qar'a'*.

By the way, thinking of another fixed expression, *tu'lu'*: I know Okrand compared it to English *there's* referring to plural, you were discussing that some weeks ago. But since I'm not an English native speaker, I don't know know how acceptable this use is in formal texts. Or in other words: when I write a formal text in Klingon, should I use *lutu'lu'* for a plural object, or is the form *tu'lu'* also acceptable?
_______________________________________________
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/20211007/f7dfd706/attachment-0004.htm>