tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jun 05 13:14:07 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: suffix-o-mania
- From: "Robyn Stewart" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: suffix-o-mania
- Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 13:12:28 PST
- Organization: NLK Consultants, Inc.
- Priority: normal
charghwI' writes:
& Robyn Stewart ([email protected]) wrote:
& > yIHHommeyna'wIjvo' HIchevnISQo'neS
& > jIDub'eghqanqqa'moHlaHbejtaHneSmo'
& >
& > What is the most intelligible nine-suffix sentence we can build?
&
& YOUR sentence is not exactly intelligible.
mu'tlheghwIjmo' jIDIvbej.
& The word order bothers me in that anything with {-mo'} works better
& at the beginning of a sentence than at the end.
& As a noun suffix, it is grammatically required,
I realize now that I must treat -mo' nouns like -Daq nouns. I was
treating them like subordinate clauses a la 6.2.2. DaH yabwIj vIlIS.
[pause]
I thought I understood, but the next posting I looked at contained the
sentence: <Saghbe'taH QujwI'pu'mo' vIng SuStel.> I would have put the
-mo' on the verb instead. Please explain more about -mo'.
& Also {-neS} doesn't make sense applied to any verb other than the
& main verb in a sentence.
Ok. I thought it was merely disgustingly fawning.
& > wovwI'
& charghwI'
wovwI'