tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Feb 25 22:54:10 1998

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: poH qelDI' tlhIngan Hol mu'tlheghmey

In a message dated 98-02-23 15:10:44 EST, DloraH writes:

<< >SKI:  I believe {'ej} joins sentences by joining the action of the verbs,
much
 >as described at length in TKD.  I do not feel confined to using it with
 >concurrent actions alone.  I have noticed that the verb suffixes {-DI'} and
 >{-taHvIS} help tell us the relationship of time that the two clauses' verbs
 >have, also.
 >
 >peHruS
 
 show me canon examples.
 I don't have a closed mind on this.  You just need to prove your idea.  The
 canon we've discussed so far support my idea.
  >>
chovnatlhmey ghItlhbogh MO vInej
vISampu'DI' vaj vIngeH

Fri, 28 Apr 1995 23:19:50 EDT ghItlh yoDtargh (R. B. Franklin)

I would translate "thence" (from that, for that reason, therefore) by using
{-mo'}:  yaS vIleghpu'mo' meH vIghoS.

For "thereafter" I would use {-pu'DI'}.  As for "thereupon" (i.e., immediately
thereafter) I would use a combination of {-pu'DI'} and {SIbI'}.

Right now, it appears that {vaj} refers to an action's occurring after another
action because of the first action.  However, {-mo'} allows us to express that
an action has occurred because of another action.  My main argument for {'ej}
joining sentences and verbs of sentences lies in TKD.  The explanation is in
black ink; see page 116.

peHruS

Back to archive top level