tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Mar 17 00:06:35 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
KLBC: -bogh
- From: Riku Anttila <[email protected]>
- Subject: KLBC: -bogh
- Date: Fri, 17 Mar 1995 10:07:14 +0200 (EET)
This was discussed not-so-long-ago, but I missed the conclusion
if there was one. I'd appreciate if someone found the time to
answer.
Let's have a lousy example: {puq qIppu'bogh yaS} it means nothing,
there is no indicated head noun. With an -'e', I could indicate the
head noun. So, what if I need to use another type 5 noun suffix,
for example {-vaD}?
So, "for the kid that the officer hit" I can think of these ways:
puqvaD qIppu'bogh yaS
Here I have no head noun (unless the -vaD makes {puq} the head noun),
but do I need one? I have an officer, who has hit the child (or child,
who was hit by the officer) and the {-vaD} applies to the child.
However, doesn't this mean "officer who hit him for the benefit of
the child."?
puq'e' qIppu'bogh yaSvaD
I read again TKD p.64 where it says "The whole construction (relative
clause plus head noun), as a unit, is used in a sentence as noun."
I take {puq'e' qIppu'bogh yaS} as a noun and apply -vaD to the end.
To me this sounds weird, but perhaps I just need to get used to this.
If it vas only {puq qIppu'bogh}, would I indeed say {puq qIppu'boghvaD
Hergh vInob} for "I give medicine for the child whom he/she hit."?
Yes? What if I were giving medicine for the officer who hit the child?
{puq qIppu'bogh yaS'e'vaD Hergh vInob}??
So, how is this done? IS this done? How would you do it?