tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Aug 18 10:38:16 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: }} -bogh
- From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: }} -bogh
- Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 10:38:16 -0400
>From: [email protected]
>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 01:26:03 -0400
>nay' luSop tlhInganpu' 'e' lutIv chaHbogh 'oH targh tIq'e'
Huh?? Oh, wait, I think I see.
>This is a test for the placement of <-bogh>. Because I am from Taiwan, I am
>used to using noun clauses marked by <-de> such as <gou xin shih tlhIngan
>xiangshou chih-de yi-dun fan>. This makes <tlhIngan xiangshou chih-de> a
>noun clause acting as a single noun entity possessing <yi-dun fan>.
>In Klingon you can see that I have placed the noun clause syntactic maker on
>the verbal pronoun.
No, I don't. I see that you have placed the relative-clause marker on a
pronoun which is not in any way shape or form functioning as a verb. You
have placed it on the *subject* of the clause; it's supposed to be on the
*verb*.
Let's do this simply:
wanI' lutIv tlhInganpu'. wanI'vam 'oH QI'lop'e'.
Klingons enjoy an event. This event is QI'lop.
Now make that a relative clause:
wanI' lutIvbogh tlhInganpu' 'oH QI'lop'e'.
The event which Klingons enjoy is QI'lop.
Note that the -bogh goes on the VERB (it's a verb suffix). We can replace
the "tlhInganpu'" with a pronoun, or leave it implicit. The -bogh never
moves:
wanI' lutIvbogh chaH 'oH QI'lop'e'.
wanI' lutIvbogh 'oH QI'lop'e'.
Now let's replace QI'lop with targh tIq and work your sentence in, slowly:
nay' luSop tlhInganpu'. wanI'vam lutIv tlhInganpu'. nay 'oH targh tIq'e'.
Klingons eat a dish. Klingons enjoy this event. The dish is targh heart.
The business with "wanI'vam" is ordinarily handled by 'e':
nay' luSop tlhInganpu' 'e' lutIv [chaH]. nay' 'oH targh tIq'e'.
Now, I see you're trying to relativize the whole clause and somehow make
the second-order object (i.e. the object of the sentence which is the
object of the relativized clause) the head-noun of the clause, and this may
or may not be possible. I have my doubts. In any case, such a thing would
be:
?nay' luSop tlhInganpu' 'e' lutIvbogh [chaH] 'oH targh tIq'e'.
Note that in NO CASE is "chaH" being used verbally. The "verb" chaH means
"they are (some things)". Nowhere do we say anything about Klingons being
things, they are simply used as the *subject* of a sentence.
~mark