tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Nov 27 17:58:15 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC Syntax - I'm lost
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC Syntax - I'm lost
- Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1996 20:57:48 -0500 ()
- Priority: NORMAL
On Tue, 19 Nov 1996 20:15:25 -0800 Ken N <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> jatlh SuStel:
>
> >Nouns with {-Daq}, {-vaD}, or {-mo'} come before the object.
>
> Got me here. I see in the TKD in the chapter on nouns they look like they
> come before. But one could interput them as the obj-verb-sub nature of
> things. If that is so then if you have a noun with the above suffixes
> couldn't they come where necessary or where they make the most sense meaning
> if they are neither the subject or object. I wish I could think of an
> example. Did I miss were that rule is or is it implied?
TKD 6.1, page 60:
"Any noun in the sentence indicating something other than
subject or object comes first, before the object noun. Such
nouns usually end in a Type 5 noun suffix." {-Daq, -vaD, -mo}
are all Type 5.
> >There's an exception (which people don't usually use, but
> >which you should know): the adverbial can come before the *verb*, if the
> >object noun has {-'e'} on it.
>
> Sorry I can't find that?
TKD 6.7, page 180.
yIlaDqa'! Hoch TKD yIlaDqa'!
charghwI'