Re: tlhIngan Hol lujatlhbogh puq'e'

["d'Armond Speers" <speersdl@msn.com>]

SuStelvo':

>A rose by any other name.  Personally, I see "subject," "object," and
>"header" as the cases of Klingon nouns.

I don't see these as cases, so much as grammatical roles.  Unless you 
subscribe to the theory that (a) all nouns are marked for case, even if it's 
not overt; and (b) Klingon is like human languages in this regard, there's 
no evidence that Klingon uses case.

>A locative noun, for instance, is
>usually a header, rarely an object, and virtually never a subject (we've
>never seen one as a subject).

I know this has been discussed ad nauseum, but I'm still confused about 
this.  Can you provide an example of a locative noun as a subject?  Unless 
you're thinking something like {Qom Dat} and are counting {Dat} as a 
locative.

Or, you're just saying that the rules don't explicitly prohibit it, and it's 
a logical possibility that one day we may see this, just like we eventually 
saw locatives as the object of verbs of motion like {ghoS}.  Not that you're 
advocating its use with what we know today.  Is that the point?

>A reason noun is virtually always a header,
>and almost never a subject or object (we've never seen any of these,
>either).  A topic/emphasis noun is rarely a header, often a subject, and
>often an object.

The term "header" is actually starting to grow on me.  (Now there's a phrase 
that doesn't translate.)

>SuStel
>Stardate 2624.0

Holtej 'utlh
Stardate 2624.6


_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com