tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Apr 28 00:15:27 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: Comparatives
jabbI'IdwIj yIlaD
> Maybe it would work better if I said: bIboghpa' qaStaHvIS cha' DIS jIyInlI'.
>
So this is a sentence with two subordinate clauses, right?
6.2.2. suggests that {bIboghpa'}, {qaStaHvIS cha' DIS} and
{jIyInlI'} may appear in any order. While this works fine
with only one SOC I think it would be very confusing here.
(Though I might have had less problems understanding
qaStaHvIS cha' DIS bIboghpa' jIyInlI'.)
I don't have an example at hand, but consider the case it
makes a difference whether both SOCs refer to the main
clause or whether (SOC1 MC) functions as MC to SOC2.
How would these two be distinguished?
> Maybe you could also say: bIboghDI' cha' ben jIboghpu'.
>
That's very nice!
> yoDtargh
>
Marc Doychlangan
--
----------------------------------------------------
Marc Ruehlaender [email protected]
Universitaet des Saarlandes, Saarbruecken, Germany
----------------------------------------------------