tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Feb 15 13:04:04 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: Krankor's article
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: Krankor's article
- Date: Sat, 15 Feb 97 20:59:12 UT
jatlh ghunchu'wI':
> Krankor proposes {mulegh SuvwI'pu'vo' cha'} "two of the warriors see me."
>
> SuStel writes:
> >We have never seen nouns with Type 5 suffixes modifying other nouns.
>
> Actually, we *have* seen a possible example of it. One of the audiotapes
> gives us {Qo'noSDaq vay' DaSov'a'?} "Do you know anyone on Kronos?" It's
> a little more logical to interpret "on Kronos" as modifying "anyone" here
> instead of "know", in my opinion. The location of the "knowing" action
> isn't what's being discussed, is it?
Actually, the sentence is {naDev vay' DaSov'a'}, and while the possiblity
still remains, you are always "here" wherever you "know" something. (Okay,
that's not a very good justification . . .) But then again, {naDev} doesn't
*have* a Type 5 suffix on it! This *could* be interpreted as "here's
someone," or "someone of here." (Also not very good.)
> >Indeed, despite Krankor's assertion that his
> >{-vo'} trick is completely grammatical, it is not. TKD p. 31 says, "When
the
> >noun-noun construction is used, only the second noun can take syntactic
> >suffixes (Type 5)." This would appear to invalidate this trick.
>
> If this "trick" isn't a noun-noun construction but is instead something
> else, the rule on p.31 does not invalidate it. It in fact gives a very
> definite way of distinguishing between a "true" noun-noun construction
> and...whatever the proposed {-vo'} trick is.
Yes, I realized this error on my part shortly after saying this.
--
SuStel
Beginners' Grammarian
Stardate 97127.7