tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Mar 04 15:42:50 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
KLBC: Returning. was (Re: KLBC:Eating)
- From: "Ian Wilkinson" <[email protected]>
- Subject: KLBC: Returning. was (Re: KLBC:Eating)
- Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 23:37:47 -0000
ja' pagh.
>jatlh 'oghwI':
>> jIcheghta'meH nIQ
>
>> I return for Breakfast.
>
>> Is this permitted?
>> I don't think the -meH can be used it the way I did, but you never
>> know I may get some of this correct some day.....
>
>You're on the right track here - you do want to use a <-meH> clause. You
>just put it on the wrong thing. What is the action of the sentence? It's
not
>breakfast - it's returning, so that should be the main verb. For the "for
>breakfast" part, you have to rephrase a bit. What does it mean? It means
you
>returned in order to eat breakfast (or perhaps buy it, or acquire it,
etc.).
>That is what the <-meH> clause is for: when you do something in order to
>accomplish something else.
>
>nIQ vISopmeH jIcheghta'. - I have returned for breakfast.
ok so,
nIQ vISopmeH jIcheghta'be'
I will return for breakfast.
I don't think that's correct I think maybe I should leave off the aspect
marker.
nIQ vISopmeH jIchegh.
This aspect thing was nice and clear and simple until I read all the
arguments.
Would you (or any of the other linguists who read this list) suggest any
basic books on general linguistics that would be a good source of
information (For a beginner).
>pagh
>Beginners' Grammarian
'oghwI'
HovpoH 99173.09