tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Mar 26 06:23:46 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: DujwIj tI'lu'

ja' peHruS:
><< qej 'e' 'aghbe'. >>
>==================
>mu' {'e'} rarlaHbogh wot tetlh vIghertaH.  pIHlaw' wot {'agh}.  nuq bIH
>vuDmeyraj'e'?  mu' {legh} buv tlhej'a'?

"I am compiling a verb list which can connect the word {'e'}."
jIyajbe'.  jInIDqa'.
"I am compiling a list of a verb which can connect the word {'e'}."
"I am compiling a list of verbs which can connect the words {'e'}."
loQ Dublu', 'ach Huj wa' Doch ngaS tetlh, 'ej Hujqu' <'e'>mey
lurarlu'bogh.  chaq <lu-> Danoppu''a'?
"I am compiling a list of verbs which can connect the word {'e'}."
tlhoS jIyajchoH, 'ach nuqDaq <'e'> rarlu' 'e' DaHech?
tlha'Ha''egh'a' mu'meylIj?
"I am compiling a list of verbs which the word {'e'} can connect."

Now that I've spent a significant amount of effort trying to figure 
out what you might have meant by your first sentence, I think I can 
start to answer your question -- except that your question seems to 
be based on a faulty understanding of the word {'e'}.  Or maybe it's 
just a simple typographical error or dictionary lookup error, and the 
words I'm reading aren't the ones you meant to type?  I'll assume you 
wrote what you meant to and go from there.

chay' <rar> Dalo'taH?  nuq DagheltaH?  qatlh Daghel?
<'e'> Dayajbe'law'.  rarwI' 'oHbe'bej.  DIp lIw 'oHba'.
wot mungDI' <'e'>, nungbogh mu'tlheghDaq qaSbogh wanI' 'oS.
cha' mu'tlheghmey tay'moHbe' <'e'>.  wot munglaHchugh DIp,
wot munglaH <'e'> 'e' chaw' pab.  chaq qechvaD Qapbe', 'ach
bIvbe'.

DaH qajanglaH.  nuq munglaH <'e'>?  wanI' ghu' ngoD qoj 'oSlaH <'e'>,
vaj wanI' ghu' ngoD qoj qellaHchugh wot, wot munglaH <'e'>. 
Qapbe'law' <HIv>, 'ach Qap <chov> 'e' vIchov.

chaq <'ang> qaq law' <'agh> qaq puS.  pImmoHbogh qech vISovbejbe'.
peghlu' 'e' 'anglaw' <'angbe'>.  pegh So'be'law' <'aghbe'>.  'ach 
bIHojchu' DaneHchugh, "Okrand" mu'tlheghmey neH yIbuS.

What you intend with the word {rar} "connect" is unclear to me.  I
don't know what you're asking, or why you're asking it, but it looks
like you're misinterpreting the role of {'e'}.  It's not a conjunction.
It's a pronoun.  It stands in for the previous topic as the object of
a verb.  It does not "join" sentences.  If a verb can have an object,
the grammar says that {'e'} can be that object.  It might not work for
semantic reasons, but it breaks no rules.

Now I think I can answer your question.  If a verb can have an event 
or situation or fact as its object, {'e'} can fit.  {HIv} "attack"
doesn't seem a likely candidate, but {chov} "assess" looks okay to me.
But if you're paranoid about being absolutely correct, just catalog 
the verbs Marc Okrand has used with {'e'}.

Perhaps the word {'ang} would have been better than {'agh}.  I'm not 
completely sure of the difference between "show, reveal" and "show,
demonstrate, display", but I figured {'angbe'} would imply that there
indeed was something hidden and {'aghbe'} would leave the issue open.

-- ghunchu'wI'

Back to archive top level