tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Dec 18 14:24:12 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: {-meH} and {Sov} (was Re: KLBC: starting right back...)
- From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
- Subject: Re: {-meH} and {Sov} (was Re: KLBC: starting right back...)
- Date: Mon, 18 Dec 1995 17:24:59 -0500
~mark writes:
>[TKD 6.2.4]...Therefore I say that a
>purpose clause precedes the noun or CLAUSE it modifies, making "jonta'
>tI'meH mIw Sov" correct but ambiguous in scope. Does "jonta' tI'meH" apply
>only to "mIw" or to the whole sentence? In practice it's unlikely to
>matter, in this case.
In this case, I don't think it IS that ambiguous. One of the subtopics of
this thread was that one rarely "knows" something in order to do something,
so it's more likely that the purpose applies to the procedure. If instead
we DO want to apply the purpose to the verb, {ghoj} "learn" makes a little
more sense than {Sov} "know". {jonta' tI'meH mIw ghoj} "In order to fix
the engine, he learned the procedure" or "He learned the procedure for fixing
the engine." THIS is ambiguous. {wejpuH. vIQatlhchoHmoHpu'.} Adding a
pronoun might make it less ambiguous: {jonta' tI'meH ghaH mIw ghoj} doesn't
seem to refer to the procedure's purpose.
-- ghunchu'wI' batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj