tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Nov 18 21:50:44 2001
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: I had an idea, I don't know how...
> jatlh qurgh:
> >Then I tried to translate "I don't know why."
> jang Jiri:
> >Would <<qatlh 'e' vIjanglaHbe'>> work?
> >(or <<qatlh mevpu' 'e' vIjanglaHbe'>>)
ro'Han:
> mu'tlhegh naQ 'oS'a' <<'e'>>? <<'e'>> lo'lu' mu'tlhegh naQ neH 'oSmeH 'e'
> vIHar. <<qatlh>> rurbogh mu'tlhegh 'ay' 'oSbe' 'e' vIHar. ('ach
> jImujlaHbej.)
> Doesn't <<'e'>> represent a whole sentence? I thought <<'e'>> was only
> used to represent a whole sentence, not a segment of a sentence like
> <<qatlh>>. (But I could be wrong.)
I was thinking of using <<qatlh>> as a one-word sentence, the way
adverbials can be used (TKD p.57), but for question words this usage is
only listed for <<chay'>> (TKD p.70). Hence the second variant in the
brackets, where I repeated the verb to make it a full sentence for sure.
On second thoughts, <<chay'>> may be a better word than <<qatlh>> anyway.
But the main question was - does QAO work if the second verb reasonably
takes a question as an object? For instance <<jang>>?
Jiri
--
Jiri Baum <[email protected]> http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jirib
MAT LinuxPLC project --- http://mat.sf.net --- Machine Automation Tools