tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Aug 11 15:39:22 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Aw: Re: adverbials

tulwI' jang SuStel:

>From: "Stephan Schneider" <>
>>  _you_ can see it this way, but the grammar implemented in your brain,
>>  can't. i'm sure that when you see /ram/ that is "wrapped" by a
>>  /-mo'/, your brain doesn't need to know that /rammo'/ has a noun in
>>  it. in order to build a sentence, you have to descrbe /rammo'/
>>  differently than "a noun with a suffix". it's "a noun with a suffix
>>  that turns a noun in to a xxx, so it's a xxx". what's xxx?
>/ram/ is a noun that means "night."  /rammo'/ is a noun meaning
>"because-of-night."  Then, because "because-of-night" isn't likely to be the
>subject or object of the sentence, the gets dumped into the "header" space.

this would make me think that there could be one "because of night".
but of course we can say that suffixes don't change the part of 
speech of a word, but then i ask: what part of speech is a "tulwI'" - 
a noun or a verb?

>Stardate 2605.6
>P.S.: /ram/ is a REALLY bad example word . . . .

it's always the bad examples that are the best examples, imho.


Back to archive top level