tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Nov 20 00:23:24 2001
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: I had an idea, I don't know how...
Jiri:
> > But the main question was - does QAO work if the second verb reasonably
> > takes a question as an object? For instance <<jang>>?
SuStel:
> The correct object for /jang/ is apparently the person being answered
> (e.g. /qajang/ "I answer you"),
Ah.
> in which case there is no way /'e'/ could be an appropriate object.
Obviously. Are there any other verbs that would take a question as an
object? (and wouldn't be verbs of saying to begin with)
Perhaps <<QIj>> or <<ngu'>>?
> Remember, if you're talking about conversation (such as "I answered, 'I
> will kill you now'"), /jang/ is not a "verb of saying."
Certainly.
I'm more wondering about QAO, if it would be more sensible if the second
verb actually did take a question as its object. <<janglaHbe'>> was the
example, translated as "I don't know", but that won't work if <<jang>> has
the wrong object...
How about:
qatlh mevpu' 'e' vIQIjlaHbe'
qatlh mevpu' 'e' vIngu'laHbe'
or
nuq tlhIHchu' 'e' ghaHvaD yIQIj
Explain to him who you really are
puqHeyvaD yIQIj
Explain! as you would a child.
Jiri
--
Jiri Baum <[email protected]> http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jirib
MAT LinuxPLC project --- http://mat.sf.net --- Machine Automation Tools