tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Aug 07 11:19:23 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: Location of {-mo'}

I agree with you on the verb suffix {-mo'} with the same degree
of preference, but not outright authority for all the reasons
you have excellently put forth. I think {-mo'} should come
first and always wince when I see it follow the main verb, even
though I put it there sometimes myself conversationally just
because I'm thinking in English and translating and my buffer
overflows when I'm working out the word order.

As a side note, {-meH} clauses do not always appear at the
beginnings of sentences. Sometimes they modify NOUNS instead of
verbs, and if those nouns are subjects, they appear between the
verb and the subject.

charghwI'

According to David Trimboli:
> 
> [email protected] on behalf of Mark Mandel wrote:
> 
> > Not really.  It's become a custom on this list to put <-mo'> clauses 
> > before the sentences they modify and recommend that others do 
> > likewise, in imitation of the canonical placement of <-meH> clauses 
> > as prescribed in TKD section 6.2.4.  But we have no canonical rule 
> > on the placement of <-mo'> clauses.  
> > 
> > Nouns with <-mo'>, on the other hand, do normally go at the beginning 
> > of the sentence... but, come to think it, I don't know where that rule is
> > stated. 
> > HISovmoH vay'!
> 
> "Any noun in the sentence indicating something other than subject of object 
> comes first, before the object noun.  Such nouns usually end in a Type 5 noun 
> suffix."  (TKD p.60)
> 
> You're right in that we don't have any information on where to put phrases 
> with the {-mo'} verb suffix.  It's a subordinate clause (as is any verbal 
> phrase with a Type 9 suffix other than {-'a'}, {-wI'}, and probably {-ghach} 
> and {-jaj}), and in that sense we might be able to place it on either side of 
> the main sentence as per TKD p.62: "Note that the order of the two parts of 
> the sentence is variable."
> 
> However, we do know that at least one type of subordinate clause, the purpose 
> clause, cannot take either order after all.  {-meH} must always come at the 
> beginning.  Therefore, we know there are exceptions to the variable order 
> rule.
> 
> I think it's possible that {-mo'} may be another subordinate clause that only 
> comes at the beginning of the sentence.  Not because it works the same way as 
> {-meH}, but rather, because its companion noun suffix {-mo'} must always be 
> located there.  No, there's no evidence to support this, and I won't tell 
> anyone using a {-mo'} phrase at the end of the sentence that they're wrong, 
> but putting it at the beginning is certainly a correct thing to do, and it 
> seems to satisfy a kind of symmetry.  I like it there.
> 
> Besides, it WOULD make {qatlh} be another sort of substitution question word, 
> which is where all the others seems to be headed (except {'ar}, of course).  
> I'm not going to try to use each argument to justify the other, but it just 
> looks like it could all fit into place like that.
> 
> -- 
> SuStel
> Beginners' Grammarian
> Stardate 97590.2
>

Back to archive top level