Re: agentive -wI'

[SoberAlien@aol.com]

Voragh wrote:
>Dajatlhbogh vIyajlaHbe'
>I find no match for what you just said. (KCD .wav file)

ro'Han wrote:
>Not having KCD, this is the first time I have seen this sentence, and I find 
>it unusual. Literally translated, I get "I cannot understand (implicit: "the 
>sentence") which you say". In my mind, it seems that <<Dajatlhbogh>> has 
>been (semi-) nominalised with no supporting suffix.

As a side-question, why is the object only implicit?  I've seen this sentence 
used before as an example of something weird or ambiguous, but I've never 
understood why.  Isn't this sentence just a shorter way of saying {'oH 
Dajatlhbogh SoH vIyajlaHbe'}?  Is there something wrong with that?

-Sengval