tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jan 27 14:25:01 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Locatives and {-bogh} (was Re: KLBC Poetry)
- From: Terrence Donnelly <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Locatives and {-bogh} (was Re: KLBC Poetry)
- Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 16:17:51 -0600
At 11:34 AM 1/27/98 -0800, charghwI' wrote:
>Nice to see your position weakening, but I'm not ready to
>concede that both methods are valid. I think the idea of using
>any Type 5 noun suffix to indicate the head noun of a relative
>clause needs to be extinguished, obliterated, disintegrated,
>dishonored and shunned so profoundly that nobody ever brings it
>up again as a "new" idea, unless Okrand personally and
>explicitly says otherwise.
maj.
[QaQbogh qechmey law' teqlu'...]
>Sorry. Your rule works, or it doesn't. It doesn't just work
>when it is useful or convenient. If you have this kind of "well
>sometimes it works" rules, what you get is a language it is
>easy to translate into and very difficult to understand once
>the translation is finished. This is the antithesis of what I
>want to happen to this langauge.
>
jIQochbe'chu'
[teqqa'lu'...]
>The point is that even if it IS a good example, which I doubt,
>it is not a USEFUL example because it uses a single word twice
>with a suffix that only works for one of its two uses, and we
>have NO grammatical rule to tell us how this works and no other
>examples to help us make up a meaningful rule. It tempts us to
>make up meaningless rules, like the one you made up which
>doesn't work because you are saying {-Daq} is acting like
>{-'e'} when there was no reason for an {-'e'} there in the
>first place.
>
>At best, it just means that an obvious head noun (with no
>ambiguity available) can take {-Daq} in order to function in
>the main clause as a locative while not being a locative within
>the relative clause. I don't see this as useful. I see it as
>confusing. I don't need it, even in this one example and I have
>no interest in corrupting other sentences with this kind of
>weirdness.
>
Dun qechmeylIj. Qermaq Qagh DaqeltaHvIS juchuH (maHvaD Qermaq Qagh DachuH?).
reH lugh charghwI', qar'a'?
-- ter'eS