tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Mar 06 20:16:14 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: E Pluribus Unum
>Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 19:01:32 -0500
>Originator: [email protected]
>From: Christopher Dicely <[email protected]>
>On Sun, 5 Mar 1995 chargwI' wrote:
Whew! Try to pare down quotations at least a little!
>> According to Christopher Dicely:
>> >
>> > On Sat, 4 Mar 1995 charghwI' wrote:
>> > > ------------------------------
>> ..
>> > > wa' qum mojchoH qum law'.
>> >
>Not really, but is "qum law'" really "many governments"? While the
>meaning is clear, the grammar seems to me to be wrong.
>"law'" in your version seems to be an adjective but it can't be since
>tlhIngan Hol doesn't have them -- if its a verb, then qum has to be the
>subject so:
>"wa' qum moj law' qum"
>BUT this is just "? becomes one government. Government is many"
>so, the "law'bogh", I think, is necessary. I might be wrong.
You are, I'm afraid. Read up on page 49, Section 4.4. Verbs of state or
quality may be used after a noun adjectivally. law'bogh qum *is* correct,
and the other way to say this, but so is qum law'.
>neH tlhIngan Hol vIghojchoH
You mean, "tlhIngan Hol vIghojchoH neH." Remember, neH is an unusual
adverbial: it follows the verb or noun it trivializes.
~mark