tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Jul 18 02:13:05 2004
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: jIH/SoH in comparatives
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: jIH/SoH in comparatives
- Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2004 05:12:21 -0400
- Bcc:
>From: Dar'Qang <[email protected]>
>
>At 02:10 PM 7/12/2004, Voragh wrote:
>
> >Now, you can certainly modify the noun in the A and B slot with a verb,
> >either with {-vIS} in this old, and somewhat anomalous example (lacking
>as
> >it does {taH}):
> >
> > QamvIS Hegh qaq law' torvIS yIn qaq puS
> > Better to die on our feet than live on our knees. ST6
> > "death while standing is preferable to life while kneeling"
>
>Even if the {taH} is replaced, this seems to imply something new to me:
>
>QamtaHvIS Hegh
>
>This appears to be an "oblique"-vIS analogous to the "oblique"-meH used to
>modify nouns. Is this a general rule, or does it fall under the rubric of
>"ancient" language (marked by the absence of {taH})?
This is a proverb that is explicitly ungrammatical (though this is explicit
in another way), and the point is made that grammatical shortcuts are
sometimes taken in proverbs. There's nothing to indicate this comes from an
older form of the language, but it is rather obvious that it is a poor model
for new grammar. General rules should not be derived from it without
further evidence.
And here's what happened in the real world: Okrand forgot that -vIS verbs
modify other verbs, not nouns, when he was considering using the phrase
"death while standing."
>i.e, can I do:
>
>?{jaHtaHvIS Soj} = "fast food"
Someone else has already pointed out the phrase {leng Soj} "fast food" from
KGT.
>can other type-9 suffixes be used in this way?
>
>?{taghDI' joqwI'} = "start flag" (as in a race)
That's an awfully big leap to make from an explicitly exceptional proverb.
SuStel
Stardate 4545.9
_________________________________________________________________
Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/