tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jun 05 11:02:49 2001

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: Noun phrases (was RE: KLBC: 'ol)

ghItlh charghwI':

<<I probably use {-meH} more than anyone else here. It is so useful in so many
settings. Meanwhile, there's one minor point that is merely an argument and
not a conclusive one: I'm pretty sure that in all of Okrand's canon,
whenever a {-meH} verb  is used to adverbially modify another verb, it has
often been a whole phrase including prefix and perhaps a subject and/or
object noun, but every time he's used it adjectivally, to describe a noun,
I've only seen him use {-meH} on a bare verb stem, as in {ghojmeH taj}.
Essentially, it becomes (if I have my terms right) a gerund for a noun-noun
genitive construction. That makes it a "learning's knife" or more smoothly,
a "knife of learning". I'm not sure it stretches to the point of becoming
"an opportunity of eating lunch". I think it is smoother as "an opportunity
of lunch".
 >>

IIRC, the phrase Okrand used when he explained this
construction was {nargh qaSuchmeH 'eb}, so I'm pretty
sure that the "verbal" form of {-meH} can be paired
with what superficially appears to be a noun-noun
construction. I agree about the need for a prefix on
the verb, though: {narghlI' megh DaSopmeH 'eb!}, or
maybe {narghlI' megh wISopmeH 'eb}.  The analysis of
{-meH} constructions I did for HolQeD a few years ago
seemed to indicate that you can use a plain verb for
impersonal constructions (eg. ghojmeH taj == ghojlu'meH
taj), but all the examples I had were lacking objects.
When the {-meH} verb has an object, it's probably safer
to go with an explicit subject prefix.

-- ter'eS

http://www.geocities.com/teresh_2000
http://www.geocities.com/weseb_2000

Back to archive top level