tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jan 22 18:26:50 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC Poetry
ja' SuStel:
>...You can use locatives in combination with relative clauses
>as long as the locative noun is either the subject or object of the relative
>clause. (Okrand said this somewhere, can someone tell me where? It was
>along the lines of, "I can't seem to make the locative be anything other
>than subject or object of the clause.")
No, what he said was he couldn't make the *head noun* of the relative clause
be anything except its subject or object. He never explicitly addressed the
grammar behind the {-Daq} in {meQtaHbogh qachDaq Suv...}
>Hegh ghopDaq 'oHbogh ghew'e'
>
>The locative is *modifying* the relative clause, not acting as its subject
>or object, and we have no way of knowing whether this is correct. From what
>Okrand has said, I'd have to say this DOESN'T work. (The fact that this
>isn't a verb but a pronoun just makes this sentence even ickier.)
The question is then whether a relative clause can have a noun other than
subject or object in it. Locatives, reasons, beneficiaries...what about
time stamps or other adverbial notions, too? I've never liked {-bogh} and
locatives, myself, but we have nothing telling us that relative clauses
can't have full-sentence-like syntax.
-- ghunchu'wI'