tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Aug 02 08:44:16 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Skybox season five klingon cards
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 17:53:48 -0700
>From: [email protected]
>However, as someone pointed out, one might try to consider the WORD {'e'} as
>an object noun, and topicalize it: ~{'e''e'}. This would seem to let you put
>the adverbial after it. The idea has merit, but since this is an optional
>way of doing things (and I, too, don't know if {'e''e'} is a legal word), I'd
>keep away from it. It's no more certain to be correct than ADV-'e'-VERB-SUBJ
>is.
I have no direct evidence for this (though there is a lack of contrary
evidence and some indirect evidence), but I believe that the pronoun "'e'"
(and "net" for that matter) cannot take ANY suffixes, of any type, period.
Note that instead of "*'e'mo'" for "because of a whole sentence", we have
"-mo'" as a verb-suffix, enabling us to turn a whole sentence into a cause,
rather than having to nominalize it and use a noun-suffix.
Since "'e'", so far as we know, can only be used as an object, and all the
type-5 suffixes except "-'e'" make nouns into something other than subjects
or objects, this statement isn't very strong for most type-5s. But it is
my (subjective) position that "-'e'" and all other noun-suffixes are
forbidden on the pronoun "'e'".
~mark
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface
iQB1AwUBMgIiOsppGeTJXWZ9AQGvGQMAmGo4lMP2adUaX6nDHHXO0O/oOvpbqFwt
NIQnM0Ze22DR5yhHOiBEh2Kh5ckHE7sGh2LOG1ncgrTuMPQd2n+jbMG+t45Po5Ub
3SnU5B68JSdcrkxGmxrdtuXk1yTKqtZn
=Irlv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----