tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Dec 15 21:42:45 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: nuQbogh jaj
ja' HovqIj:
>ghaytan wa' jaj bIjor 'ej bIQID'eghchu' qoj latlhpu' DaQIDchu'.
>rut QeHlIj DatlhabmoH 'e' qaq law' QeHlIj DavI' 'e' qaq puS.
>[...]
>You probably dislike that I used a sentence with <'e'> as the subject of
>the <law' / puS> construction, right? I wouldn't have dared to do this,
>but I'm _quite_ sure we have canon for this (one of the skybox cards, I
>think). If I am wrong here, I am going to accept it.
I can see what you are trying to say here, and I think I see how you
are trying to say it:
"That you sometimes free your anger is preferable to that you accumulate
your anger."
Someone needs to hit you with a painstick! Unless you can come up with
this purported canon, you're *way* off base here. {'e'} is always used
as the object of a sentence, and by your own explanation you're trying
to use it as a subject. That's even assuming that the noun phrases in
a {law'/puS} construction even count as subjects.
If *I* am wrong here, and there *is* canon precedent, *I* am of course
going to accept it. :-)
This sort of idea is one of the places where I think {-ghach} actually
works well: {QeHlIj tlhabmoHghach qaq law' QeHlIj vI'moHghach qaq puS.}
-- ghunchu'wI'