[2747] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: po puv bortaS! (translation)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Mon Jan 24 17:19:06 1994
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@klingon.East.Sun.COM>
From: Will Martin <whm2m@uva.pcmail.virginia.edu>
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@klingon.East.Sun.COM>
Cc: tlhIngan-Hol@klingon.East.Sun.COM
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 94 16:06:41 CST
In-Reply-To: <9401241841.AA17432@uva.pcmail.Virginia.EDU> (message from Will Ma
rtin on Mon, 24 Jan 94 13:41:08 EST)
>2nd - This is the topic of current controversy. Most people agree that
>the wording in TKD primarily justifies {-ghach} only when there is some sort
>of suffix after the root verb.
Really? When did this sea change come about? For a long time on the
list this never seemed to be the consensus. I have geenrally used
-ghach when an explicit corresponding noun wasn't listed; I think of
it as a general gerund marker.
-QumpIn 'avrIn erich@bush.cs.tamu.edu
