tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jun 16 21:57:56 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: SIS
In a message dated 98-06-15 09:23:08 EDT, ghunchu'wI' writes:
<< > << 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:
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.
>>
Okay, this gives "During the week which preceeded everything, it rained and
rained some more." This does fit Klingon grammar.
However, I had suspected that ter'eS had attempted to say "During the whole
week preceeding, it rained and rained." I hope I am wrong, for I would have
to say that ter'eS's attempt is wrong, too. I would not like the confusion
caused by putting a number-noun before a long clause.
peHruS