tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Oct 09 19:37:29 2008

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Relative clause fun

d'Armond Speers ([email protected]) [KLI Member] 

Relative clauses are discussed in TKD 6.2.3.  We are given the option of
referring to the subject of the clause:

    qIpbogh yaS vIlegh

...or the object:

    yaS qIpbogh vIlegh

However, in other languages there are other options for which element of the
relative clause can be the head noun, besides just the subject and object.
I¹m wondering whether their omission from TKD is just absence of evidence,
or evidence of absence.  (I.e., are they possible but not described, or are
they not possible because they are not described?)

Here are some example cases:

(A) Indirect Object

    loDvaD tev lunobbogh chaH ghaH [John]¹e¹
    John is the man who they gave the prize to

(B) Object of preposition

    DujDaq nov vIleghbogh vItI¹
    I fixed the ship at which I saw the alien

(C) Possessive

    yaS HIch vItI¹bogh ghaH
    He¹s the officer whose gun I fixed

Interestingly, we couldn¹t use the {-¹e¹} disambiguation with any of these.

nuq SuQub?

--Holtej

Back to archive top level