tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Feb 15 13:04:04 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: Krankor's article

jatlh ghunchu'wI':

> Krankor proposes {mulegh SuvwI'pu'vo' cha'} "two of the warriors see me."
> 
> SuStel writes:
> >We have never seen nouns with Type 5 suffixes modifying other nouns.
> 
> Actually, we *have* seen a possible example of it.  One of the audiotapes
> gives us {Qo'noSDaq vay' DaSov'a'?} "Do you know anyone on Kronos?"  It's
> a little more logical to interpret "on Kronos" as modifying "anyone" here
> instead of "know", in my opinion.  The location of the "knowing" action
> isn't what's being discussed, is it?

Actually, the sentence is {naDev vay' DaSov'a'}, and while the possiblity 
still remains, you are always "here" wherever you "know" something.  (Okay, 
that's not a very good justification . . .)  But then again, {naDev} doesn't 
*have* a Type 5 suffix on it!  This *could* be interpreted as "here's 
someone," or "someone of here."  (Also not very good.)

> >Indeed, despite Krankor's assertion that his
> >{-vo'} trick is completely grammatical, it is not.  TKD p. 31 says, "When 
the
> >noun-noun construction is used, only the second noun can take syntactic
> >suffixes (Type 5)."  This would appear to invalidate this trick.
> 
> If this "trick" isn't a noun-noun construction but is instead something
> else, the rule on p.31 does not invalidate it.  It in fact gives a very
> definite way of distinguishing between a "true" noun-noun construction
> and...whatever the proposed {-vo'} trick is.

Yes, I realized this error on my part shortly after saying this.

-- 
SuStel
Beginners' Grammarian
Stardate 97127.7

Back to archive top level