[86606] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: na'ran rur [Re: Klingon WOTD: na' (verb)]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (ghunchu'wI')
Thu Oct 1 07:14:10 2009
In-Reply-To: <27a7b7f70909301341s6f1554aao4cd0cc493a4f1378@mail.gmail.com>
From: "ghunchu'wI'" <qunchuy@alcaco.net>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 07:12:03 -0400
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
On Sep 30, 2009, at 4:41 PM, qurgh lungqIj wrote:
> Should there be an -'e' on Soj to mark is as the head noun of the -
> bogh
> clause or is that optional?
>
> na'ran rurbogh Soj'e' luSop tera'ngan 'e' lutIv.
It's optional.
Since {na'rsn'e' rurbogh Soj} seems a silly thing to say, I would
consider marking {Soj} to be superfluous.
--ghunchu'wI'
