[84595] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: latlh
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (ghunchu'wI')
Mon May 5 17:11:07 2008
In-Reply-To: <6D1F7D80-4C7B-4608-98F3-1F3FB13E69B7@embarqmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 17:08:55 -0400
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
From: ghunchu'wI' <qunchuy@alcaco.net>
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
On May 5, 2008, at 11:01 AM, Doq wrote:
> I'm not suggesting that it is being used as a Klingon adjective. I'm
> suggesting that it is being used as an English one.
A less contentious interpretation might be to call it an "attributive
noun". If you want another example, look at {baS 'In}. Such words
indeed act as adjectives in English, but they can just as easily fit
the Klingon N-N construction alongside other genitive uses.
I suggest that you should just swallow the canon usage and be done
with it, instead of chewing on it and complaining about the bitter
taste. :-)
