tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Nov 21 14:01:33 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: RE: KLBC Syntax - I'm Lost
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: RE: KLBC Syntax - I'm Lost
- Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 16:58:49 -0500 ()
- Priority: NORMAL
On Wed, 20 Nov 1996 15:07:52 -0800 David Trimboli
<[email protected]> wrote:
> jatlh Ken N:
>
> > >> muHoHbe'wI' muHoSmoHbej
> >
> > Why is this wrong. It looks fine and makes sense????????????
>
> It's not a problem with sentence order,...
What do you mean, "It's not a problem with the sentence order"?
As a hypothetical, imagine that it was okay for *muHoHbe'wI'* to
be a word. Let's imagine it is a noun meaning "thing that does
not kill me". What would that noun's function be in this
sentence? Would it be the OBJECT of {muHoSmoHbej}? I don't think
so. {mu-} as a prefix suggests first person object, third person
subject. The third person thing in this sentence seems to be
{*muHoHbe'wI'*}, but if it IS the SUBJECT, why does it PRECEED
the verb? Hmmmm?
Neither of you guys noticed this?
wejpuH.
So, the word order is backwards AND the misplaced subject is a
rather odd word. It is not fine and does not make perfect sense.
> SuStel
> Beginners' Grammarian
> Stardate 96889.6
charghwI'