[86072] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: Klingon translation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Doq)
Sat Jun 27 18:34:07 2009
From: Doq <doq@embarqmail.com>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
In-Reply-To: <d18.497718d0.3777f746@wmconnect.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 18:32:51 -0400
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
qay'be'.
On Jun 27, 2009, at 6:29 PM, MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com wrote:
> In a message dated 6/27/2009 18:19:55 Eastern Daylight Time,
> doq@embarqmail.com writes:
>
>> While I like using the suffix {-'e'} to mark the head noun that links
>> the relative clause and the main clause, Okrand has rarely used it,
>> and in this particular case, since there is only one noun in the
>> relative clause, it doesn't really need to be marked.
>>
>> What you've written is definitely not wrong. It's just putting an
>> unusual quantity of focus on {nuHvetlh}.
>>
>> Doq
>>
>
> Good point. Like I said, I should have just read the whole post
> before
> jumping in.
>
> lay'tel SIvten
>
>
>
