tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jun 09 14:47:57 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: Object wIjatlhlaH'a'

jatlh peHruS:

> In a message dated 97-06-08 12:01:34 EDT, SuStel writes:
> 
> << qaja'pu' HIqaghQo'
>  
>  You cannot say that the position of {HIqaghQo'} shows that it is the 
object.
>  
>  (I'm not claiming that it definitely is not, though that is my opinion.)
>   >>
> 
> HIqaghQo' qaja'pu' is legal according to TKD 6.2.5, entitled "Sentences as
> Objects."
> ji'oj jatlh 'avwI' is legal according to my feelings.
> 
> Please note the title of the section.
> 
> "Similarly, with verbs of saying (say, tell, ask, etc.), {'e'} and {net} are
> not used.  The two phrases simply follw one another, in either order."
> 
> Further ....."An aspect marker may always be attached to the verb of saying,
> regardless of whether it is the first or second verb."

I agree: {HIqaghQo' qaja'pu'} and {jI'oj jatlh qama'} are perfectly valid 
sentences.  However, these sentences do not prove that quotations are the 
objects!  The reversibility of the order of the sentences suggests that they 
are not.  The choice of prefix on every single use of {ja'} in canon (and 
there are quite a lot) also suggests it, by never making the quotation and the 
object happen to match.

-- 
SuStel
Beginners' Grammarian
Stardate 97438.8

Back to archive top level