tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Apr 14 17:23:44 2001
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: Qov qeqmeH mu'tlheghmey
> > As was already pointed out, a verb with the suffix {-meH} goes before the
> > noun or verb that it modifies. So your second sentence here would be:
> > {jIjangmeH, <HIja'> <ghobe'> ghap vIjatlhlaHbe'} "In order for me to
> > reply, I cannot say 'yes' or 'no'."
>
...
> {jatlh} can have a direct object, but that object would be a word like
> {Hol} or {SoQ}. It would not be the direct quote itself. The order of these
> two grammatically independent sentences is reversable. As a matter of
> style, I tend to favor putting the sentence of speech before the direct
> quotation just because it makes it all the more obvious that the quotation
> is not the direct object of the verb of speech. It also matches what we've
> seen Okrand do more often than not.
>
> So, with all that said, how do you use the verb of speech in this case when
> you have two different quotations, preferably joined by the conjunction
> {ghap}? Well... I don't know. When faced with a grammatical challenge like
> this, I tend to back up and recast, even if it is a little more awkward.
> Ewww. It's even messier than that, since {jIjangmeH} combines badly with
> {-laHbe'} statements like this. Am I intentionally unable to say yes or no
> in order that I promote the goal of answering?
>
> Okay...
>
> jIjang vIneH 'ach jIjatlhlaHbe' <HIja'> qoj jIjatlhlaHbe' <ghobe'>.
> jIqarmeH jIQIjnISlI'.
>
> If I wanted a short version of this, I'd just use the last sentence.
>
> SarrIS
Qagh DaDelbogh vIyaj. mu'tlheghvetlh vIqonDI', vIpar. 'ach QInDaq
vIratlhmoH. qechwIj rachchu'be', vaj qaqbej mu'tlhegh pIm. reH
jIghojtaH.
[I understand the error you describe. As soon as I wrote that sentence,
I didn't like it, but I left it in the message. It does not strengthen
my idea very well, so a different sentence would certainly be
preferable. I am always learning.]
quS'a'Qob bu', qa'rIl puqloD