[84591] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: latlh
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Terrence Donnelly)
Mon May 5 10:43:43 2008
Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 07:41:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: Terrence Donnelly <terrence.donnelly@sbcglobal.net>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
In-Reply-To: <440DA150-FFB4-4EB1-B995-1DAB52107641@embarqmail.com>
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
--- Doq <doq@embarqmail.com> wrote:
> I would appreciate it if someone could, in a post
> less than one screen
> full of text, explain to me how using {latlh} as an
> adjective makes
> sense, given the Klingon grammar we've been offered
> by Okrand.
I have always understood the N1-N2 construction to
mean that N1 was modifying or restricting the item
referred to in N2. Thus {yaS taj} "of the universal
set (or concept) of all knives, the one associated
with the officer". This understanding also explains
titles {qolotlh HoD} "of the universal set of
captains, the one who is Koloth" and numbers {cha'
Duj} "of the universal set of ships, two of them".
And I think it also explains the use of {Hoch}, {'op},
{latlh}, etc.: {latlh paq} "of the universal set of
books, another of them." It can even account for the
reversed usage of these terms {paq 'op} "of the
universal set (or concept) of some(ness), that
referring to the book".
-- ter'eS
