tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Nov 29 15:32:00 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Noun-noun with {'e'}
- From: Marian Schwartz <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Noun-noun with {'e'}
- Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 18:31:32 -0500
ghItlh Qov
>}Can someone tell me why I shouldn't use {'e'} as the first noun of a pair
>}of nouns in this way? This is scaring me; the longer I look at it, the
>}more I think it works. I'm not going to run with it just yet; I'll wait
>}for somebody to point out the obvious reason for it's being wrong. :-)
>}The week is not yet finished, and I really didn't want to get into a big
>}debate over yet another topic at the frontier of Klingon grammar...
>
>For one, {'e'} is a pronoun, and pronouns are only used in possessives
when
>it's a noun of proximity. 'ej vIpar jIH. DujwIj Davoq'a' :)
And because, to quote Krankor (if I remember it correctly): "{'e'} is
explicitly listed under the section of "Sentences as objects." We should
not assume, without clearer evidence from canon, that it can be used for
Sentences as subjects." This usage isn't a subject, but it's something
other than direct object. (That *is* an interesting question. In {vaj Duj
chIj} is {vaj} the object? This doesn't seem right; could someone give a
clear argument to disprove it?) But *I* do believe that you can say
{'e''e' vISov!} "I know *that*!"
Qapla'
qoror