[872] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: law'/puS
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Fri May 14 06:18:32 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
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
From: Captain Krankor <krankor@codex.prds.cdx.mot.com>
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
Date: Fri, 14 May 93 03:06:52 -0400
To Everyone:
trI'Qal recently posted a long thing arguing that the A/B slot in the
law'/puS construction does not need to be a noun (or noun phrase). My
personal read on this issue is that a noun phrase is intended, but, frankly,
I would *love* to be wrong, because it would indeed open up law'/puS to be
far more flexible and useful.
So I'm really curious what other people think. I'd like to therefore
take this opportunity to exhort people to really give his post a good read
and post your own opinion on the subject (if you have one).
To briefly summarize my own current position:
1) "thing" really seems to me to imply "noun phrase"
2) The loosely literal translation says "A's Q is many...", using a
possessive, which strongly makes A look like a noun.
But like I said, I would be delighted to be wrong. What do people think?
--Krankor
