tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Aug 21 17:41:11 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: tlhab jaj
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: tlhab jaj
- Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 20:40:27 -0400 ()
- Priority: NORMAL
On Tue, 13 Aug 1996 01:43:07 -0700 "A.Appleyard"
<[email protected]> wrote:
...
> naDev vIlughmoH 'e' vInID A.Appleyard:-
> > QaQ 'oH. vIleghpu'.
> > jabbI'IdghomDaq lut wanI'mey DIja'chuqchugh 'ej vaj lut De' wI'angchugh,
> > (lut legh 'e' Hech nuvpu''e')vaD lut bel QIH 'oH
>
> {lut legh 'e' Hech nuvpu''e'} = is a relative clause used as a noun, and
> that noun wants a -vaD suffix: "for people who intend to see the story": where
> should the -vaD go?
If it is a relative clause, why has it no {-bogh}? And why
bother with {-'e'}? It is not a grammatical necessity and
it fills the Type 5 spot needed for {-vaD}. {lut legh chaH
'e' Hechbogh nuvpu'vaD}. ngeD Qu'vam.
charghwI'