tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Aug 29 17:28:38 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: Purpose Clauses
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: KLBC: Purpose Clauses
- Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 14:27:03 EDT
In a message dated 8/10/1999 9:31:31 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:
<< I suppose for something to be a "clause" it must have a verb, so that's a
reasonable way of putting it. I tend to think of 'ej and qoj and pagh as
*verb* conjunctions, while je and joq and ghap are *noun* conjunctions.
A subordinate or relative clause is formed by putting a suffix on the verb
in an otherwise unremarkable sentence. Apparently Type 9 verb suffixes do
not keep a phrase from being conjoined with another phrase.
>>
==============
DaH jIQoch'chuqbe'chu', jupwI'.
peHruS