tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Apr 25 06:11:15 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Headless relatives and {SuDbogh Dargh 'ej wovbogh}

David Trimboli ([email protected]) [KLI Member] [Hol po'wI']

From: "QeS lagh" <[email protected]>

> Expanding a little on the example you gave above, would {SuDbogh 'ej
wovbogh
> Dargh} and {romuluSngan Sambogh nejwI' 'ej HoHbogh} be acceptable?
>
> Between {SuDbogh Dargh 'ej wovbogh} and {romuluSngan Sambogh 'ej HoHbogh
> nejwI'}, the main difference in terms of grammatical structure just seems
to
> be one of the location of the head, and it would seem that the location of
> the head isn't too restricted. I'm not trying to push the envelope here, I
> just want to find out whether these two constructions are the same
envelope.

The thinking goes that /SuDbogh Dargh 'ej wovbogh/ may be more technically
correct (that is, it follows the second-noun-is-elided explanation of TKD),
but that a couple of verbs that are closely bound may be combined and
treated somewhat as a single verb.  Thus, /SuDbogh 'ej wovbogh Dargh/
wouldn't be out of the question, as /SuDbogh 'ej wovbogh/ "blue/green/yellow
and light" could be looked at as a single verb, and the meaning is the same.
This probably wouldn't work for more complex constructions.

This reasoning is conjecture, but it seems to fit canon: sometimes the
second noun of conjoined verbs is elided, sometimes the first is.

So yes, I would accept your phrases as reasonable.  However, in the case of
the Romulan probe, I'd hesitate to change the order.  Since we know that
/HoHwI'/ "killer" can be used by itself to refer to the Romulan
hunter-killer probe, it may be that /romuluSngan Sambogh 'ej HoHbogh nejwI'/
is arbitrarily fixed as it is.  Without knowing, I'd tend to leave all known
phrases in the order I found them.

SuStel
Stardate 4316.3

Back to archive top level