tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Jul 13 14:23:01 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: adverbs
- From: "Sangqar (Sean Healy)" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: adverbs
- Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2002 19:21:25 +0000
>>For my dictionary, I made a list of adverbs.
>>Yes, I know in Klingon they are treated as chuvmey, but in english, they
>>are adverbs, so I list them like
>>that :-)
Note that although MO tells us that there are "three basic parts of speech
in KLingon: noun, verb, and everything else", he uses English grammar terms
when discussing, so this seems appropriate.
>>net
>
>why <net> is an adverb? it seems like a noun to me.
/net/ is explicitly called a pronoun in TKD.
>>nuq
>
>why "nuq"? what kind of word is a question-word? (maybe... a
>"question-word"?)
MO labels it as a question word in TKD, so that terminology seems
appropriate. In English, 'questions words' are generally called
interrogatives; interrogative pronouns, interrogative adjectives,
interrogative adverbs, etc.
>>tagha'
>
>is <tagha'> an exclamation? i think that an exclamation is like one frase,
>it's no adverb. is that right?
tagha' is defnitely an adverbial, but:
Adverbials sometimes occur alone, functioning more or less as exclamations
(TKD, p.57) (This is the last paragraph in section 5.4 for those of you who
don't use the English version.)
>i'd like to add:
>
><chaq>
This one's fine.
><Dat>
><DaHjaj>
><naDev>
><pa'>
These are all classified as nouns, actually. They're some of those tricky
nouns that are not subjects or objects but don't have a Type 5 suffix. We
are told explicitly in TKD that /Dat/, /naDev/, and /pa'/ never take a Type
5 suffix (p. 27, sec. 3.3.5).
_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com