tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Dec 18 05:52:53 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: {-meH} and {Sov} (was Re: KLBC: starting right back...)
Pardon my crashing in after skipping a few hundred messages,
but my Email turned into a wormhole and here's where I popped
back in to this universe. -charghwI'
According to [email protected]:
>
> qaSDI' Hovjaj 95951.1 ghItlh HomDoq:
>
> >On the other hand, the first one may be (according
> >to 6.2.4.) "She knows (the procedure to fix the engine)."
> >(the second correspondingly). I've never been very
> >comfortable with this usage of {-meH}. In order to
> >construct the meanings yoDtargh has given above, and
> >which I questioned, would one use sth. like
> >{mIw jonta' tI'meH Sov}?
Why is the purpose clause between the direct object and the
verb? Purpose clauses should preceed that which they modify. It
would be much more clear as:
jonta' tI'meH mIw Sov.
In order that she repair the engine, she knows the procedure.
See? In Klingon, word order makes a world of difference.
> Can anyone cite an canon (I'm beginning to hate that word) example of using
> {-meH} with {Sov}? I think the usage is perfectly valid, and the problem
> HomDoq is having is due to thinking too much in English (or whatever his
> native language may be). HomDoq, I read your sentence as "In order to repair
> the procedure's engine, he knows." This makes no sense to me. Perhaps to a
> native Klingon speaker, {jonta' tI'meH mIw Sov} is perfectly valid.
I don't think the problem is with the chosen affix. I think the
problem is with the word order.
> SuStel
> Hovjaj 95953.2
>
charghwI'
--
\___
o_/ \
<\__,\
"> | Get a grip.
` |