tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Dec 08 18:15:50 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: qama' cha' raQ (Fw: walls)
- From: TPO <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: qama' cha' raQ (Fw: walls)
- Date: Tue, 08 Dec 1998 21:16:12 -0500
>> hmmm... interpreting N-N as a unit, I would have said
>> {cha' qama' raQ} for both "(two-prisoner)-camp(s)" and
>> "two prisoner-camps" and let context sort it out.
>>
>> {qama' cha' raQ} might (besides "prisoners' two camps")
>> mean "prisoner #2's camp", so this isn't unambiguous either.
>>
>You are right about the ambiguity of my choice about the
>prisoner.
>
>qama' cha' raQ could well be "Prisoner #2's camp". Okrand
>intentionally has some ambiguities build into the language, and
>in this case, I'm comfortable with context typically
>disambiguating this phrase. If need be, we can always drop back
>to {raQ'e' Dabbogh qama' cha'} vs {cha' raQ'e' Dabbogh qamapu'}.
>
>Basically, I consider where the rest of the noun phrase is
>functioning. For me, the number two is applied to camps, not to
>prisoners and placing it before the word {qama'} is applying it
>to the word for prisoners. Each noun in a noun-noun can be a
>noun phrase, so I don't have a problem with placing the number
>between the nouns.
When spoken we (I) would tend to pause between words in a manner that would
seem to group a noun phrase, helping to clarify which noun in the noun-noun
it belongs to.
Likewise, I write it in a similar manner. Don't know if any of you ever
noticed "extra" spaces in my sentences sometimes, they're there where I
would pause when speaking; but not a pause for [ , ] or [ . ].
qama' cha' raQ two camps
qama' cha' raQ #2 prisoner
Nothing major. The pause when speaking is nothing major either; but without
thinking about it, along with context, we understand what's being said.
DloraH