tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Jun 21 15:49:37 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Adverbials
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Adverbials
- Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 18:50:47 -0400 ()
- Priority: NORMAL
On Thu, 19 Jun 1997 22:17:10 -0700 (PDT) Alan Anderson
<[email protected]> wrote:
> ja' SuStel:
> >Meanwhile, how do we express adverbially concepts for which we do not have a
> >specifically glossed adverb.
>
> I do different things for different ideas. Often, {-taHvIS} does a very
> good job of expressing the concept. For example, "He fights fiercely" can
> be {qu'taHvIS Suv}. But {-taHvIS} is certainly *not* a direct replacement
> for the English "-ly"!
Suvchu'meH qu'.
In order to fight perfectly, he is fierce. I much prefer to
express a sense of purpose relating these verbs rather than
simple simultenaety.
> >Assume we want to say, "A group of warriors must fight together." We get
> >{SuvDI' SuvwI' ghom tay'nIS chaH}. We have not used an adverb at all;
> >rather, we have reconstructed the phrasing to use a main verb with a relative
> >clause.
>
> Watch the terminology here. The Type 9 verb suffixes {-DI'}, {-vIS}, {mo'},
> {-chugh}, and {-pa'} indicate *subordinate* clauses. A *relative* clause
> is created with {-bogh}.
>
> I'd have translated this using a continuous aspect rather than an
> instantaneous event: {SuvtaHvIS SuvwI'pu' tay'nIS}.
I still prefer to imply a sense of purpose rather than simple
simultenaety. {SuvmeH tay'nIS SuvwI'pu'.}
> -- ghunchu'wI'
>
charghwI'