tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Nov 22 11:09:30 1993
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Relative clauses continued
- From: [email protected] (The Songbringer -- Marnen to the common folk)
- Subject: Re: Relative clauses continued
- Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 14:06:45 EST
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>; from "Nick Nicholas" at Nov 23, 93 3:01 am
Doch tlha' jatlh nichyon/niqniqolaS:
:
:
: To Mark E. Shoulson respond I thus:
:
: #>DureS, wi'orv HoHghach Dujmo'
: #Well, given our understanding of "-ghach" we'd probably do {DureS HoHghach
: #wi'orv(?) Dujmo'}, yielding plenty of ambiguity in the N-N construction,
: #but that's life.
:
: But Mark! Why regret you this construction? "The ship of Worf's killing of
: DureS"! It makes sense in Klingon (left-nesting), *and* in English! A
: fabulous construct! batlh mu'tlhegh da'oghpu'!
jiQochbej. >DureS HoHghach wi'orv Duj< = "DureS's killing's Worf's ship", which
makes no sense. Better would be >DureS wi'orv HoH[ghach] Duj<, or "D's W's
killing's ship". Stop screaming, it makes sense. "D's W's killing's ship" =
"((W's killing) of D)'s ship". I'm not sure this is any better, but I wonder.
:
: ===
: Momenton senpretende paseman mi retenis kaj # NICK NICHOLAS. Melbourne Uni,
: kultis kvazaux & Australia. Now with moustache.
: senhorlogxan elizeon # [email protected]
: (Dume: & >[email protected]<
: [Victor Sadler, _Memkritiko_ 90] # [email protected]
:
:
Qapla' Qichqemwi'vo'.
--
===============================================================================
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ | Marnen E.
| |/ \ \ / \ \ / \ \ | |/ \_\ | |/ \ \ / \_\ | |/ \ \ | Laibow-Koser
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |/ | | | | | laibow@brick.
|_| |_| |_| \_\|_| |_| |_| |_| \_\_/ |_| |_| | purchase.edu
| SUNY Purchase
===============================================================================