tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Apr 05 13:44:43 2004
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: wa'leS as noun
- From: "QeS lagh" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: wa'leS as noun
- Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2004 06:44:03 +1000
- Bcc:
ghItlhpu' SIvten:
>so far i haven't heard an answer to my question:
>can i say: latlh jaj 'oH wa'leS'e' = tomorrow is another day.
qajangta' jIH. jIghItlhpu':
I thought I had:
>I think you can; the KLI website uses {ben qep'a'} to say "past
>{qep'a'mey}". Time stamp nouns may behave oddly, but they are true nouns,
>with everything that implies.
Meaning that they can appear in subject and object positions, and in
noun-noun constructs, like everyday nouns. I was using {ben qep'a'} as an
illustration. Also good is SuStel's example {cha'vatlh ben HIq}. SuStel,
<canon>vam chonobta'mo' qatlho'qu'.
bIghItlhtaH:
>"ben" is treated differently from "leS" and "Hu'", in that the latter two
>are usually written as part of a compound word, whereas "ben" is always
>separate.
Like Holtej, I see no problem with saying {cha'ben}. Remember, too, that
just because words are treated differently in one aspect of their grammar
doesn't mean that they are different in *every* way. For instance, we
wouldn't say that {neH} doesn't behave like a verb just because it doesn't
take {'e'} in Sentence As Object constructions.
And be careful about saying <always>! Okrand might hear you. :D
>does anyone have a problem with the sentence above?
>or with: Hoch jaj rur wa'Hu'/DaHjaj = yesterday was/today is like every
>day.
Holtej jIH je maQochbe': mu'tlheghvam DIlajlaH.
Savan.
QeS lagh
_________________________________________________________________
What's your house worth? Click here to find out:
http://www.ninemsn.realestate.com.au