tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Feb 07 09:52:17 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: KLBC: 'e' x-lu'??

ja' HovqIj:
>Going through TKW I realized the two sentences
>yInlu'taH 'e' bajnISlu'
>yay chavlu' 'e' bajnISlu'
>I suppose this has been discused before, but why did MO use <'e'
>bajnISlu'> and not the expected form <net bajnIS> in these examples?
>Maybe the reason is that he wanted to parallel the <-lu'> from the first
>part of the sentence?

It might be worth considering what TKD 6.2.5 actually says about {net}:

|   When the verb of the second sentence has a third-person subject
|   (that is, the pronominal prefix is 0) but the intended meaning is
|   /one/ or /someone/, rather than /he/, /she/, /it/, or /they/,
|   {net} is used instead of {'e'}.

Note that it doesn't say "{net} is *always* used instead of {'e'}."
It's possible that the intended meaning with {'e' X-lu'} isn't quite
"one" or "someone" -- the translation uses English passive voice and
not an impersonal subject.  One could also argue that using the suffix
{-lu'} makes the verb not have a third-person subject, so {net} is not
strictly necessary.

>Thinking about this, is the use of <'e' x-lu'> under normal
>circumstances (i.e. not in a proverb) wrong or just uncommon?

In my opinion, {net} is definitely preferred, but I don't think {'e' X-lu'}
is ever actually *wrong*.  It's probably a cultural or style thing,

-- ghunchu'wI'

Back to archive top level