tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Jan 13 18:26:16 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
KLBC: Re: Saj von Suq Qa'Hom cha'DIch'e'
- From: "Sean Healy" <[email protected]>
- Subject: KLBC: Re: Saj von Suq Qa'Hom cha'DIch'e'
- Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 23:26:15 +0000
>I became too confused with trying to find something to represent cheese
>like
>"food made from milk".. I then decided to take a different tack.. Afterall
>the [Suq Qa'Hom] might not like cheese.. The common denominator of any food
>used in a trap is simply (I thought) "trap food" or "food for trapping" or
>something like that... Therefore I thought I'd be safe with [Food - Saj]
>and
>use the verb for [trap,entrap - von] adjectively to get [Saj von]... Was
>that not ok?
food = Soj, qar'a'?
chaq <<vonmeH Soj>> Dalo'laH, vaj:
chaq ghargh Suq vem'eq 'eq 'ach vonmeH Soj Suqbogh 'oH Qa'Hom cha'DIch'.
Although I'm not sure whether a {-bogh} phrase can stand alone like this,
since the {-bogh} phrase itself is intended as the predicate complement
here. This could be interpreted to mean that the second {Qa'Hom} is the
trap-food which is gotten, which is not the intent at all. Perhaps:
chaq ghargh Suq vem'eq 'eq 'ach vonmeH Soj Suqbogh Qa'Hom'e' 'oH cha'DIch'.
Although I'm not sure whether {cha'DIch} can stand alone, either.
Ordinarily, you can add {-wI'} to a descriptive verb to make it mean 'one
who is', so we don't see adjectives standing alone (at least I haven't, but
perhaps canon examples exist). But I don't know whether {cha'DIch} can mean
'the second one' and therefore act as a noun, or whether it just means
'second', and therefore must have a noun to modify.
And perhaps the {-'e'}, while intended to mark the {Qa'Hom} as the head noun
of the {-bogh} phrase, may be interpreted as marking the topic of the entire
sentence.
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx