[Tlhingan-hol] tera' Hovtay'Daq PLUTO HurDaq bIHtaH'a' latlh yuQmey?

[Alan Anderson]

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:54 PM,  <lojmitti7wi7nuv at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think that as a community, we’ve gotten sloppy with {latlh} because we
> want to use it like {tlhIngan} in {tlhIngan Hol} and treat it like an
> adjective in our translations without checking to make sure that it actually
> makes sense as a noun.
>
> It’s a noun. We can’t forget that inconvenient truth. The definition is
> “(noun) additional one, another one” and we keep wanting to eliminate the
> word “one” from it and use it to mean “(adjective) additional, another”.
>
> I hope this trend doesn’t succeed and we start acquiring a new kind of
> chuvmey that precedes a noun and acts like an adjective. We already have
> {Hoch} being treated like this as often as not, and numbers, of course...

latlh HIvje'Daq 'Iw HIq bIr yIqang.

-- ghunchu'wI'