tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Apr 29 16:21:44 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: Comparatives
On Fri, 28 Apr 1995, Marc Ruehlaender wrote:
> jabbI'IdwIj yIlaD
>
> > Maybe it would work better if I said: bIboghpa' qaStaHvIS cha' DIS
> > jIyInlI'.
> >
> So this is a sentence with two subordinate clauses, right?
> 6.2.2. suggests that {bIboghpa'}, {qaStaHvIS cha' DIS} and
> {jIyInlI'} may appear in any order. While this works fine
> with only one SOC I think it would be very confusing here.
> (Though I might have had less problems understanding
> qaStaHvIS cha' DIS bIboghpa' jIyInlI'.)
>
> I don't have an example at hand, but consider the case it
> makes a difference whether both SOCs refer to the main
> clause or whether (SOC1 MC) functions as MC to SOC2.
> How would these two be distinguished?
The follow text appears on Skybox Trading Card SP1. The card is entitled
{Qo'noS wo'} and it talks about the symbol of the Klingon Empire. The
third sentence is an example of a sentence with three subordinate clauses.
tlhIngan wo' Degh 'oH Deghvam'e'. tlhIngan Dujmey law'qu' SommeyDaq
batlh cha'lu'. juHqo' Qo'noSvo' loghDaq lengtaHvIS tlhInganpu' 'ej qo'mey
Sar charghtaHvIS chaH Dat tlhIngan may'Duj luleghDI' neH qIb nganpu' buQpu'
may'Duj 'ej ghIjpu' 'oH. nIteb ghIjpu' je Deghvam.
> Marc Doychlangan
yoDtargh