tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Aug 27 14:37:31 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: grammer question
From: "Steven Boozer" <[email protected]>
> 1. reH Hov ghajbe'bogh ram rur pegh ghajbe'bogh jaj.
> A day without secrets is ALWAYS like a night without stars.
>
> But, can you say:
>
> 2. ? Hov ghajbe'bogh ram rur reH pegh ghajbe'bogh jaj.
> A day ALWAYS without secrets is like a night without stars.
>
> or:
>
> 3. ? reH Hov ghajbe'bogh ram rur pegh ghajbe'bogh jaj.
> A day without secrets is like a night ALWAYS without stars.
>
> or even:
>
> 4. ? reH Hov ghajbe'bogh ram rur reH pegh ghajbe'bogh jaj.
> A day ALWAYS without secrets is like a night ALWAYS without stars.
>
> Granted, 2 is easy to understand. But if you can say 3 or even 4, how do
> you disambiguate them from 1? Add {-taH} to the relevant verb perhaps?
E.g.:
Just because it may be ambiguous doesn't make it evidence that it can't be
done.
We DO have examples of /-Daq/ nouns modifying /-bogh/ verbs and not the main
sentence. I believe these happen to all occur as part of the object, not
subject, so it's ambiguous (but the intended meaning is not always
ambiguous). I was collecting them last night, but thought they might be
countered with "But those are nouns, not adverbials!" so I didn't send them
to the list. But the principle is the same.
Let's see . . . here's one from SkyBox 99:
. . . 'u' SepmeyDaq Sovbe'lu'bogh lenglu'meH He ghoSlu'bogh retlhDaq 'oHtaH.
'u' SepmeyDaq Sovbe'lu'bogh
in unknown regions of the universe
This is clearly a /-Daq/ noun phrase modifying a /-bogh/ phrase. There is
no mention of such a thing in TKD, but it obviously works.
From S7 we have
DujvamDaq tlhIngan nuH tu'lu'bogh pov law' Hoch pov puS 'ej DujvamDaq 'op
SuvwI' tu'lu'bogh po' law' tlhIngan yo' SuvwI' law' po' puS.
Here we have two of these constructions: /DujvamDaq tlhIngan nuH tu'lu'bogh/
"Klingon weapons which are found on this ship" and /DujvamDaq 'op SuvwI'
tu'lu'bogh/ "some warriors which are found on this ship."
SuStel
Stardate 2655.2