Re: RE: KLBC: Two IFs on one THEN?

["William H. Martin" <whm2m@server1.mail.virginia.edu>]

Just to add a tidbit to an excellent answer:

On Mon, 25 Jan 1999 15:37:43 -0800 (PST) "Andeen, Eric" 
<Eric.Andeen@Sequencia.com> wrote:

> jatlh Dawut:
> 
> > Greetings,
> 
> > Clipped Question:
> > Can I put two IFs on one THEN if I use an AND?
> 
> HIja'.
> 
> > Full Question:
> > I was corresponding with the crew of the {Qo'noS qa'} when I 
> > wrote the following sentence:
> 
> > bIvchugh targh, 'ej bobcho' SumchoHchugh targh, vaj bIt 
> > tera'ngan. If the targ breaks the rules and gets near the 
> > module, then the Terran will be nervous.
> 
> There is no problem with the two <-chugh> clauses, but there is another
> problem. In charghwI''s interview with Marc Okrand in the last HolQeD, we
> got quite a bit of new information, including a bit about <Sum>. We now know
> that it cannot take an object. The most common usage is simply <Sum X>,
> meaning that <X> is near the speaker. If you want to say that something is
> near something else, you would say <X-Daq Sum Y>. 

I believe that it is also acceptable to say {Sumchuq X Y je}. I 
think that satisfies the whole diexis thing. If I'm 
misremembering the interview, forgive me. It has been a while 
since it happened.

Also, if the subject (or
> object) is the same in the second clause, you don't need to repeat it. I'd
> also add a <-choH> to the <bIt>. Here's what you wind up with then:
> 
> bIvchugh targh 'ej bobcho'Daq SumchoHchugh, vaj bItchoH tera'ngan.

Excellent.
... 
> > Corrections and Comments welcome.
> 
> When you added the KLBC, you asked for comments from me. Now it's open to
> everyone.
> 
> 
> pagh
> Beginners' Grammarian

Being but one small part of everyone, I reply...

charghwI' 'utlh