tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jun 11 20:33:21 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: long weekend with MO
ja' DloraH:
>[according to Marc Okrand:]
>You can not use a "question" as an object; but... it is not known yet if
>klingon question words can act as one of those relative things, uh, relative
>pronoun is it? You guys know what I'm refering to.
>So basicly we didn't really get anywhere with this one yet.
>The safest thing for now would be to recast if possible.
It looks like one of Captain Krankor's favored phrasings has indeed been
wrong all along, though. His standard explanation for using things like
{nuqDaq yuch Dapol 'e' vIqaw} explicitly denies that he's trying to use
{nuqDaq} as if it were a relative pronoun, claiming that the {'e'} stands
for the question, or its answer, or something somehow intimately tied to
the question. The good Captain will certainly continue to argue that it
doesn't break the rules because it really isn't the question itself that
his {'e'} refers to, but that argument itself goes against the rule that
says {'e'} *does* refer to the previous sentence.
But it *is* nice to know for certain that questions may not be objects.
-- ghunchu'wI'