tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Feb 10 14:05:25 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC> HaDIbaHpu' le' mach
ghItlh ghunchu'wI':
> >> >Ha'DIbaH cha': rammey Hoch 'e' wIqaSmoHtaHbogh wIqaSqa'moH,
> >> >DoqwI': yuQ wIchargh 'e' wInID!
> >>
> >> What's {'e'} doing there? It can only be referring to Animal #1's
> >> question, but that doesn't seem right.
> >>
>
> ter'eS writes:
> >No, actually it refers to the second part of yab's reply; turned around and
> >with some stuff omitted for clarity
>
> {'e'} can't work that way; it stands for the *previous* sentence.
Well, that answers that. You can't invert a sentence for emphasis, so a
sentence like *{'e' vISov: qoH SoH} is not legal, right?
My intention in this sentence was to avoid a literal object. {Doch rap}
seems too concrete to me; I think {Doch} should refer only to actual
physical items. {ta'} seems more goal-oriented than Pinky's question
warrants. So tell me this:
Can you use a verb with {-bogh} by itself as an object? That is, can
{wIqaSmoHtaHbogh} mean "that which we are doing"?
>
> -- ghunchu'wI' batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj
>
- ter'eS