tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Nov 18 09:06:02 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: {X 'e' Y-lu'}
- From: Carleton Copeland <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: {X 'e' Y-lu'}
- Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 20:06:49 +-300
- Encoding: 53 TEXT
Is it the rule then that adverbials in sentence-as-object constructions can modify only the final (main) verb?
qa'ral
----------
From: William H. Martin[SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: 18 iiya?y 1999 a. 14:27
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: {X 'e' Y-lu'}
On Thu, 18 Nov 1999 15:26:14 +-300 Carleton Copeland
<[email protected]> wrote:
> jatlh voragh:
>
> > For some reason, even after going into such detail in the Dictionary,
> > Okrand took an intense dislike to {net} and has never used it again
> > in any other source AFAIK. This prejudice explains the frequent use
> > of {'e'} even where the grammar is unusual, even controversial.
>
> jatlh charghwI' 'utlh:
>
> >> If your presumption about his motive is correct, then your
> >> observation is correct. Meanwhile, if this instance in which
> >> there is an indefinite subject in both the first and second
> >> sentence and both verbs are referring to the same indefinite
> >> entity, this may very well be an exception to the use of {net}.
> >> If this is true, then the effect is identical to your presumed
> >> cause.
>
>
> {X net Y-lu'} qelbogh nger wejDIch vIchup:
>
> Inasmuch as both {net} and {-lu'} identify verb Y as having an impersonal
> subject, perhaps the combination is heard as redundant, thus rendering the
> more common {'e'} at least optional.
>
> vaj tlhoS nIblaw' tlha'bogh wej mu'tlheghmey:
>
> yay'lu'taH 'e' not mevlu'!
> yay'lu'taH net not mev!
> yay'lu'taH 'e' not mev vay'!
Look more closely at your word order. Adverbials preceed direct
objects, unless the direct object is emphasized with the Type 5
noun suffix {-'e'}, and there is no evidence that this is legal
for the pronouns {'e'} or {net}, so your {not} is consistently
misplaced.
> qar'a' qa'ral?
charghwI'