[714] in tlhIngan-Hol
Suffix rules
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Thu Apr 29 08:30:23 1993
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
From: A.APPLEYARD@fs1.mt.umist.ac.uk
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
Date: 29 Apr 93 10:35:47 GMT
Some time ago someone wanted to write `qama'pu' HoHlaHlu'` = "one can kill
prisoners" but could not. Now again the rule against two suffixes of the same
numbered class has caused inconvenience: on Wed, 28 Apr 1993 12:10:31 -0400
"Adeena J. Mignogna" <quasar@wam.umd.edu> (Subject: hello) wrote:
> pongwI' Adeena. jabbI'IDvamwI' wa'Dich. jIH QaQbe'. jabbI'IDvam lughbe'.
> choQaH! -Adeena
but `jabbi'iDvamwi'` = "this my email message" = "this email message of
mine" has two class 4 noun suffixes. How (without a circumlocution so wordy
that people are tempted to break the rule for brevity) to say this legally?
There seems to be a case for relaxing the rule against two suffixes of the
same class number on the same word.
