tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Feb 05 14:59:07 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: A -moH suggestion
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: A -moH suggestion
- Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 19:59:07 GMT
majQa'. mubelmoH qech Dachupbogh.
charghwI'
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[email protected]>
>
>
> > jatlh SuStel:
> >
> > > I'd like to suggest that /-moH/ shouldn't cause your
> > > brain to do backflips when trying to understand it.
> > > These two sentences should "feel" the same when
> > > you read them:
> [--snipped--]
> > There is a bit of a problem if you try to say, "I'll teach
> > you Klingon language." It looks like "you" and
> > "Klingon language" are both objects of {ghojmoH}. In this
> > case, the verb "teach" is "ditransitive", meaning that it
> > has two objects, though Klingon doesn't really have a
> > place in its grammar for two direct objects. That's when
> > it is good to remember that {ghojmoH} is {ghoj} plus {-moH}.
> >
> > When I teach you, I cause you to learn. I don't cause
> > the Klingon Language to learn. The cleanest, least
> > controversial way to say, "I'll teach you Klingon
> > language," is to split it up into smaller sentences, like:
> >
> > qaghojmoH. tlhIngan Hol wIHaD.
>
> Excuse my insanity here but I'm sure it someone said that [noun-'e'] can be
> treated as a header noun... IF that's correct it would seem to me to make
> sense for a sentence like this to just be
> tlhIngan Hol'e' qaghojmoH
> I teach you, (as to) Klingon Language
>
> or inan example where O & S are specified
>
> tlhIngan Hol'e' loDHom ghojmoH powI'
>
> [--snipped--]
> >
> > charghwI'
> > 'utlh
>
> qe'San
>