[tlhIngan Hol] Daghtuj jaj 'oH jajvam'e'

[James Landau]

A bit surprising, but that's what it looks like . . . I searched my email box for "wa'DIchDaq* and found a post by Michael Kounenos that uses it. And a search on the Klingonia corpus for *DIchDaq* yields 28 results, some of which are lavender (meaning they're published by the KLI). 


>From: Steven Boozer <sboozer at uchicago.edu>
>To: "tlhingan-hol at kli.org" <tlhingan-hol at kli.org>
>Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Daghtuj jaj 'oH jajvam'e'
>Message-ID:
>    <SN7PR11MB80418F0997CED357D65CEBB5C151A at SN7PR11MB8041.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
>    
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>Apparently, the latter.  Okrand once sent a note to SuStel:
>>qep'a' wejDIchDaq jatlhtaH tlhIngan Hol HaDwI'pu'.  ghoHtaH je.  tIv'eghtaH je.
>(MO to SuStel, st.klingon 11/1996)
>>AFAIK it?s our only example of {-Daq} and the ordinal number suffix {-Dich} used together.  SuStel commented:
>>(SuStel 12/18/1996):  ... in answering my letter about qep'a' wejDIch, Marc Okrand used the phrase qep'a' wejDIchDaq.  Now, it could be >considered just a [proper] name, but it may also be possible that noun suffixes can go to the ordinal number.


  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20250718/cbdad86f/attachment.htm>