tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue May 25 06:14:46 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: SachtaH Holmaj!
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: RE: SachtaH Holmaj!
- Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 09:14:36 -0400
- Importance: Normal
- In-Reply-To: <F2824E0390EBD1118D4C0008C724E4D101242D96@rock-msg-s1.thomtech.com>
> In a message dated 5/12/1999 7:40:20 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
> [email protected] writes:
>
> << ><< <> jatlhmeH mIwmey qel wa' nav. >>
> >==============
> >Just a question about using the verb prefix {lu-}. Would it fit on {jatlh}
> >in the sentence above? Would the entire phrase <> be considered a singular
> >object in tlhIngan Hol?
>
> I'd say the <> phrase is a direct quote, even in a {-meH}clause. Thus the no
> object prefix, in this case the null prefix is required. >>
> ==========
> Then, there remains the question of what is the head noun of the {-meH}
> clause. It appears obvious to me in this sentence the head noun of the
> clause is {mIwmey}, which is plural.
In which case, the comments of HovqIj are completely accurate. Plural subject, no object,
null prefix is required. What's the question?
> peHruS
-- Holtej 'utlh
tlhIngan Hol Mailing List FAQ
http://www.bigfoot.com/~dspeers/klingon/faq.htm