tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jul 29 21:09:59 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: TKD phrase: {-meH} clause

...Paul ([email protected]) [KLI Member] 

On Fri, 30 Jul 2004, QeS lagh wrote:
> What I said was not that it would take no prefix, just that it wouldn't have
> to take one. If the purpose clause modifies a noun, then the head noun is
> not necessarily the subject of the purpose clause. Look at {ghojmeH taj}; in
> that, the knife's not doing any learning. Of course, there's nothing saying
> that you can't say {ghojlu'meH taj} anyway.

Ah, I see.  I think my confusion also stems from a feeling I have that
purpose clauses don't really "modify" anything.  Admittedly, this is just
a little idea that is sitting in the back of my head and I'm at a loss to
really back it up, so I won't go into it just yet.  :)

> Unfortunately, the canon doesn't show too many examples of {-meH} clauses
> modifying nouns in actual sentences. We're given things like {vutmeH 'un},
> {ghojmeH taj}, {pe'meH taj}, but few in-situ usages of them.

I did not think to look at the two-part nouns in the vocabulary!  These
really throw it all into chaos.

> >tlhutlhlu'meH HIq ngeb qaq law' bIQ qaq puS
> >"For one to drink, fake ale is preferable to water."
>
> This makes sense; after all, {Heghlu'meH QaQ jajvam} was the KGT translation
> of "Today is a good day to die", and not {HeghmeH QaQ jajvam}.

Unfortunately, the "quote" in TKW does not have /-lu'/, which casts
further question on the whole subject.  :P

...Paul

 **        Have a question that reality just can't answer?        **
  ** Visit Project Galactic Guide http://www.galactic-guide.com/ **
  "Do not follow where the path may lead.  Go instead where there
          is no path and leave a trail." -- Muriel Strode

Back to archive top level