tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Mar 05 05:11:56 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: jI'eqlaw'
- From: Will Martin <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: jI'eqlaw'
- Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 08:11:47 -0500
At 10:28 AM 3/2/96 -0800, you wrote:
>ghItlh charghwI':
>>DaHjaj po *Excel* vIghojmoH. yaHvamDaq loQ jIpaS 'ach paSqu'mo'
>>ghojwI'wI' Hoch jI'eqlaw'.
>>
>>ghIHqu'mo' DujHomwIj, pIch vIghaj. chaq tugh vIghIHHa'moH.
>
>chay' DupaSmoH DujHomlIj?
pIch ghajbe' DujHomwIj. mupaSmoHbe'. jIpaS 'ej ghIH DujHomwIj. latlh
qaSmoHbe' wa' wanI'.
>QIt DulengmoHta''a' 'ughqu'mo'?
taQ mu'tlheghlIj 'ach vIyajlaw'. ghobe'. ghIH DujHomwIj, 'ach 'ughmeH
DujHomwIj, DujHomwIjDaq yapbe' Dochmey.
>bItlhe'Ha''a' bIlegh 'e' waQmo' DI?
yajlu'meH <bIlegh 'e' waQmo' DI, bItlhe'Ha''a'?> ngeD law' <bItlhe'Ha''a'
bIlegh 'e' waQmo' DI?> ngeD puS. This is not a stated rule, but a somewhat
indirect one. We know that {-mo'} as a noun suffix makes the attached noun
necessarily come before the main clause and then we are told that {-mo'} as
a verb suffix acts just like the noun suffix. He does not explicitly say
that the verb clause needs to come before the main clause, but in practice
it is a LOT easier to understand that way.
'ach ghobe'. muwaQ pagh.
>lamchoHbe'meH ghopDu' pogh DaSamnIS'a'? ('e' tlhob puqloDwI')
loQ lam DujHomwIj, 'ach ghIHqu' DujHomwIj. Say'nISbe'. DI neH vIlojnISmoH.
>-- ghunchu'wI' batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj
charghwI'