tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jun 09 08:01:49 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Object wIjatlhlaH'a'
>Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 00:34:08 -0700 (PDT)
>From: [email protected]
>
>jatlh loD: qagh vISop vIneHbej mu'mey may'morghvam wIlo'laH net
>Sov
>qagh vISop vIneH bej jatlh loD mu'tlhegh mu'mey may'morghvam
>wIlo'laH'a'
Word-protest? Huh?
>It is not the same idea, but {qar'a'} can appear almost anywhere in a
>question. Relative clauses need not be in a set position in a sentence. In
>Mandarin the dependent clause always precedes the main clause. Okay,
>tlhIngan Hol does not follow the rules of ANY Terran language, let alone
>Mandarin. Still, I get the feeling we can put verbs of speaking after that
>"sentence" which is spoken, thus identifying the "sentence" as the Object of
>the verb of speaking.
I think this is canon, that verbs of speaking can precede or follow the
sentence spoken. Okrand says so. There's some debate over whether or not
the sentence spoken thereby does or does not constitute the object of the
verb of speaking. The current feeling is that it doesn't, but personally I
can't really shake it myself. I keep wanting to hear vI- and Da- prefixes
instead of jI- and bI-.
~mark