tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Mar 25 20:40:03 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: KLBC: lIy Hale-Bopp
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: KLBC: lIy Hale-Bopp
- Date: Wed, 26 Mar 97 03:56:28 UT
On Tuesday, March 25, 1997 10:43 AM, [email protected] on behalf of
[email protected] wrote:
> wa'Hu' ram, lIyHey vIlegh. Hov rur 'ach ngup wew tuQ 'oH. 'IHqubej.
> Last night, I saw what looked like the comet. It resembled a
> star, but it wore a glowing cloak. It was certainly very beautiful.
Oh, that was almost a perfect sentence! I'll get the the main problem below.
You forgot a glottal stop in {'IHqu'bej}, of course. But that was an
absolutely PERFECT use of {-Hey} on {lIyHey}.
You might have wanted to say {tuQtaH}. It's not necessary, but the comet was
not wearing it as a single action. It still is "wearing" it.
> TDK 4.4 says I can use a verb as an adjective if it comes immediately after
> the noun it qualifies. Can I then use the noun as an object as I did with
> ngup wew?
You can only do this if the verb is one that expresses a state or quality (is
stative). Unfortunately, {wew} is "glow," not "be glowing." You can either
substitute {boch} "be shiny" here (which loses some of the flavor, I think),
or you could say
wewtaHbogh ngup tuQtaH
It was wearing a glowing cape.
{wewtaHbogh ngup} is "cape which glows."
To answer your question: yes, if you use adjectivally acting verbs, they can
fit in anywhere.
veng tIn vIlegh.
I see the big city.
--
SuStel
Beginners' Grammarian
Stardate 97232.5