[87075] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: pu'jIn
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Doty)
Tue Nov 24 20:49:52 2009
In-Reply-To: <DDF2BAEE-2679-45CF-AA2E-4BD453C97C0B@alcaco.net>
From: Christopher Doty <suomichris@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:48:07 -0800
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
> Read on in TKD for an explanation of *how* to combine nouns in that
> way. The nouns follow one another; they do not attach to one another.
Dude, fine, typo. As I said.
>> Is there any known semantic or phonological or syntactic or
>> morphological
>> (read: ANY) difference between a noun–noun construction and a
>> compound in
>> Klingon, besides the orthography?
>
> For a semantic difference, perhaps {'Iwghargh} "bloodworm" vs. {'Iw
> ghargh} "blood's worm" or "worm of blood"?
>
> I can't speak for everyone, but when I say {HolQeD}, the first
> syllable gets less stress than when I say {Hol QeD}.
This is what I would expect, since the final syllable of a noun gets
stressed, so two nouns that are independent of each other (that is, in
a N-N construction) likely have independent stress on both nouns, but
HolQeD, since it is a compound, should only have stress on the QeD,
no?
