tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Aug 07 08:00:49 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
> > >How do you know a subject/object isn't steeling the noun away from the
>> >header area? :P
>> there is no suffix that can to that, as far as i remember. well, if
>> /naDev/ is a noun that can work in the header area, and i add a
>> /-Daq/, then /-Daq/ claims that /naDev/ is working in the body area
>> in order to make him work in the header area again, which wouldn't
>> make much sence.
>> no, i don't think there is a way to turn a header-guy into a
>> body-guy. turning a body-guy into a header-guy is much easier, even
>> tho there is not much grammar in klingon to to that.
>> (for example, you don't even have to add a suffix in order to turn
>> /batlh/ (working in the body area) into /batlh/ (working in the
>> header area).)
>My point is that you're not changing anything from one place to another. In
>order to change FROM something, it first needs to BE that something. Before
>you write a sentence the nouns are all sitting in a pile, simply waiting to
>be used; they are not part of any body or header. If you need a time-stamp,
>you pull out the appropriate noun from the pile and put it in the time-stamp
>place. If you need a locative, you pull out the appropriate noun from the
>pile and place it in the locative position. If there is an object, you pull
>a noun out of the pile and put it in the object place. Then you pull a verb
>out of the verb pile and put it in the verb place. Then you pull out
>another noun and place it in the subject position. Those first couple nouns
>that you pulled out were never assigned as a subject/object. Placing a noun
>in the header area doesn't change a noun FROM a subject/object TO a
>time-stamp or locative or anything else in the header area.
you can see it this way, and it's even easier to understand than what
i wrote, i guess.
so tell me, what do /-Daq/, /-vaD/ and /-mo'/ do, speaking with terms
like "noun", "header" and so on?
> > > > >The noun /batlh/ can be a subject or object.
>> >> >The adverbial /batlh/ can only be used as an adverbial,
>> showing up before
>> >> >the OVS body (in the header area).
>> >> so i cannot use the noun /batlh/ in the header area, wheras i can use
>> >> the noun /ram/ in the header area?
>> >> tell me, you don't like to see it this way, neither, do you?
>> >Actually the noun /batlh/ could be in the header if it had a
>> -vaD or -mo'.
>> also the noun /ram/ can be in the header if it has a /-vaD/ or
>> /-mo'/. but you said:
>> At 14:45 Uhr -0400 27.07.2002, DloraH wrote:
>> >/ram/ "night" is a noun. It can be used in the body of the sentence as a
>> >subject or object, or it can show up before that (in the header
>> area) used
>> >as a time-stamp.
>> so /ram/ (noun) can occur in the header area, used as a time-stamp,
>> without adding a suffix (that wouldn't exist anyway).
>Yes /ram/ can have a -vaD or -mo'. A time-stamp isn't the only thing it can
>be used for. I didn't say it was used ONLY as a time-stamp when in the
that wasn't my point. from my point of view, /rammo'/ is not a noun.
(also in english you wouln't say that "due to the night" is a noun.)
i meant the naked /ram/ that can occur in the header and in the OVS
> > is this wrong? if not, why this pattern isn't valid for /batlh/?
>Which pattern. The noun /batlh/ can be in the header with the
>suffixes -vaD, and -mo', etc. /batlh/ can't be used as a locative because
>it is not a location, you can't physically be AT "honor". Likewise, how can
>/batlh/ be used as a time-stamp?
no. i still mean the naked /batlh/, /ram/ (and /naDev/). and the
pattern i meant is about being naked (without any suffix) in the
header or naked in the OVS body:
/batlh/ is a noun that can occur naked in the body.
/batlh/ is an adverbial that can occur naked in the header.
/naDev/ is a noun that can occur naked in the body.
/naDev/ is a noun that can occur naked in the header.
/ram/ is a noun that can occur naked in the body.
/ram/ is a noun that can occur naked in the header.
i see a pattern there. the only thing that doesn't match is that
/batlh/ in the header is called an adverbial. it would be easier to
say that /batlh/, /naDev/ and /ram/ are nouns that can occur "naked"
in the header.
> > > > >(** the following requires a fixed-width font)
> > >> >
>> >> >wa'Hu' Qe'Daq nom yaS qIp HoD
>> >> >"Yesterday in the restaurant the captain quickly hit the officer."
>> >> >
>> >> >|- - - h e a d e r a r e a - - -| |- - b o d y a r e a - -|
>> >> >| | | |
>> >> >time-stamp | locative | adverbial | | object | verb | subject |
>> >> > | | | | | | |
>> >> > wa'Hu' Qe'Daq nom yaS qIp HoD
>> >> >
>> >> > (noun) (noun) (adverbial) (noun) (verb) (noun)
>> >> beautiful.
>> >> so, referring to what i wrote earlier, /-Daq/ turns a body part into
>> > > a header part. ok?
>> >In this example, Qe' was never part of this body. It was taken from the
>> >pile of words (the dictionary) and placed in the locative position; and
>> >because it's being used as a locative in this sentence, it get's
>> >a -Daq so we know what it's doing here.
>> you're right. i meant:
>> /-Daq/ turns someone that would normally work in the body part into
>> someone that has to work in the header part. i didn't mean this very
>> body area and this very header area.
>> i don't think that we add /-Daq/ in order to underline that we are
>> using a noun in the header area, but we use /-Daq/ in order to use a
>> noun in the header area, so, in order to turn a body-guy into a
>Just because he's a noun doesn't mean he's a body-guy.
but just because he's a _naked_ noun makes it probable that he's a body-guy.
but the rest above is more important than this point.
> > > > suffixes. for example, they select the noun from a body to have a new
>> >> bodypart: /Qong yaS/ <body> -> /Qongbogh yaS/ <bodypart>. or they can
>> >> turn a body into a header: /Qong yaS/ <body> -> /Qongchugh yaS/
>> > > <header>.
>> >I wouldn't say that last one goes in the header. It has a verb and a
>> >subject; the type 9 turns it into a clause that modifies the
>> >main sentence.
>> and how do you call this? i need names! :)