tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Nov 20 08:25:08 2001
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: I had an idea, I don't know how...
From: "Jiri Baum" <[email protected]>
> Jiri:
> > > But the main question was - does QAO work if the second verb
reasonably
> > > takes a question as an object? For instance <<jang>>?
> Perhaps <<QIj>> or <<ngu'>>?
You're talking to someone who doesn't accept the Question As Object
construction. I just don't think Sentence As Object was intended to be used
that way.
> How about:
>
> qatlh mevpu' 'e' vIQIjlaHbe'
> qatlh mevpu' 'e' vIngu'laHbe'
One of the objections to QAO is that the two sentences don't quite match
each other. An English speaker would not accept "I cannot explain 'why has
he stopped?'" I cannot explain the REASON he has stopped, not why has he
stopped? (Notice how that last sentence makes no sense?) As far as makes
sense to me, the object sentence cannot be a question.
mevpu'. meq vIQIjlaHbe'.
> or
>
> nuq tlhIHchu' 'e' ghaHvaD yIQIj
> Explain to him who you really are
/nuq tlhIHchu'/? Yuck!
ghaHvaD pengu''eghchu'!
> puqHeyvaD yIQIj
> Explain! as you would a child.
Why did you use /puqHey/? We're not talking about an apparent child here.
puq rur; ghaHvaD yIQIj.
Sometimes translations can be too literal.
SuStel
Stardate 1888.0