tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jan 20 14:17:21 1998

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: Fw: Problem with {-meH} and negative meanings



At 08:33 PM 1/18/98 -0800, Qermaq wrote:
>Here's the latest from MO on our new forum - news://startrek.expertforum
>
>Qermaq
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Marc Okrand <[email protected]>
>>This presents a number of options (there are certainly others):
>>
>>    {jIpaSqu'mo' narghpu' qaSuchmeH 'eb.} "Because I'm very late, the
>>opportunity to visit you has escaped."  ({-mo'} "because," {narghpu'} "has
>>escaped," {qaSuchmeH 'eb} "opportunity for me to visit you")
             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is a very interesting construction, to me.  We've known for a while
that verbs with {-meH} used with nouns can seem to function almost like
adjectives of purpose, eg. {pe'meH taj} from KGT.  But always before
the usage has been impersonal.  In fact, we've generalized this to the
notion that true verb phrases can also be impersonal in the {-meH} part
of the phrase, even if the main verb has an explicit subject: ?{pu'HIch
DIlmeH, Huch 'ar DapoQ} for {pu'HIch vIDIlmeH...}.

But here is MO using a personalized verb in a {-meH}+noun construction.  I
like it a lot.  It seems more flexible than the {-bogh} construction.
Could it, I wonder, have an expressed object: ?{nargh vavwI' vISuchmeH 'eb} 
'an opportunity to visit my father has escaped'.  How about an expressed
subject: ?{vavDaj SuchmeH jupwI' 'eb} 'an opportunity for my friend to
visit his father'.  Could the suffix {-'e'} play the same disambiguating
role it does with {-bogh}: ?{vavDaj SuchmeH jupwI' 'eb'e'}, or does
it need to?  To me, interesting questions all.

(Also, to toot my own horn, I'd like to point out how similar {nargh 'eb}
is to the construction I used in my translation of the {tlhoghtay} from
DS9, where I translated "but it was too late" as {'ach ngabchu' 'eb}.
Just a little self-promotion 8+) )

-- ter'eS  




Back to archive top level