tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jul 24 18:09:49 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: suffix-o-mania
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: suffix-o-mania
- Date: Wed, 24 Jul 1996 21:10:16 -0400 ()
- Priority: NORMAL
Yes, I really am this far behind in my mail.
On Wed, 5 Jun 1996 13:19:07 -0700 Robyn Stewart
<[email protected]> wrote:
> charghwI' writes:
>
> & Robyn Stewart ([email protected]) wrote:
> & > yIHHommeyna'wIjvo' HIchevnISQo'neS
> & > jIDub'eghqanqqa'moHlaHbejtaHneSmo'
> & >
> & > What is the most intelligible nine-suffix sentence we can build?
> &
> & YOUR sentence is not exactly intelligible.
>
> mu'tlheghwIjmo' jIDIvbej.
>
> & The word order bothers me in that anything with {-mo'} works better
> & at the beginning of a sentence than at the end.
> & As a noun suffix, it is grammatically required,
>
> I realize now that I must treat -mo' nouns like -Daq nouns. I was
> treating them like subordinate clauses a la 6.2.2. DaH yabwIj vIlIS.
> [pause]
> I thought I understood, but the next posting I looked at contained the
> sentence: <Saghbe'taH QujwI'pu'mo' vIng SuStel.> I would have put the
> -mo' on the verb instead. Please explain more about -mo'.
I read this as "While they are (continuously) not serious, because of the players, Sustel
whines." It is ambiguous, as well, since it could mean, "While he is not being serious,
Sustel whines because of the players."
If the {-mo'} were applied to the verb and the sentence were {Saghbe'taHmo' QujwI'pu' vIng
Sustel}, it would mean something closer to "Because the players continue to not be serious,
Sustel whines." Is the cause the noun or the action of the verb? That is the reason {-mo'}
can be applied to either nouns or verbs.
Does this help?
> & Also {-neS} doesn't make sense applied to any verb other than the
> & main verb in a sentence.
>
> Ok. I thought it was merely disgustingly fawning.
You can fawn any time you like. You have a special license.
> & > wovwI'
> & charghwI'
> wovwI'
charghwI'