tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jun 15 08:31:51 1998

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: SIS



In a message dated 98-06-15 09:22:46 EDT, charghwI' wrote:

>On Sun, 14 Jun 1998 22:54:39 -0700 (PDT) [email protected] wrote:
 
 >> In a message dated 98-06-13 11:14:46 EDT, ter'eS wrote:
 >> 
 >> >qaStaHvIS Hoch nungbogh Hogh SIS 'ej SISqa'.   
 >> 
 >> Putting Hoch before nungbogh Hogh implies that nungbogh Hogh works
together >>as
 >> one compound noun, right?  Interesting?
 
 >Why do you consider the verb {nungbogh} to be a noun? Perhaps it 
 >is just your choice of terminology. Meanwhile, I read this as a 
 >rather odd sounding:
 
 >"It rains while the week which preceeds everything happens and 
 >it rains repeatedly," or less likely, "It rains while everything 
 >which is preceeded by the week happens and it rains again."
  
 >I see tereS using {nung} as a transitive verb with {Hogh} as 
 >subject and {Hoch} as object. {Hoch nungbogh Hogh} then becomes 
 >a relative clause. It does sound like tereS likely didn't intend 
 >this message to mean what it appears to mean, but I would not 
 >relate the error to anything I'd call a compound noun.
 
Oops, you're right.  I didn't even see this possible interpretation until you
mentioned it.  What I meant to say was "during all of last week".  {nungbogh}
was supposed to just mean "last".  Maybe I could use your coined word
{vebHa'} instead.  The other problem, though, is that I now have doubts that
{Hoch} is the appropriate word with {Hogh}.  {Hoch Hogh} I now think should
be understood as "every week".  "All week" I now think should be {Hogh naQ}.
(Of course, now I have the problem of how to apply both {vebHa'} and {naQ}
to one noun!)

-- ter'eS

 



Back to archive top level