Re: chotwI'/mang

[Stephan Schneider <sts@stephan-schneider.net>]

lab SuStel:

>From: "Stephan Schneider" <sts@stephan-schneider.net>
>>  >  > naDevHa' chaHtaH 'ej Hol rapHa'qu' jatlh 'ej Qobqu' 'op chaH.
>>  >  > (they are so far away and speak a very different language, and some
>>  >  > of them are very dangerous.)
>>  >
>>  >naDev is a noun.  -Ha' is a verb suffix.
>>
>>  jes, but the noun /naDev/ can act like an adverbial, which sometimes
>>  can take /-Ha/ (like /batlh/). /-Ha/ is a rover, isn't it?
>
>I'm not going to get into the rest of the message; just this part.  We'd
>already been discussing /naDev/ and adverbials.
>
>/naDev/ is a noun.  It is not an adverbial.  No matter what /naDev/ does, it
>is still a noun, and nouns do not use /-Ha'/.
>
>Someone (you?) gave a definition of "adverbial" that came out to "any word
>that modifies the verb as an adverb might," or thereabouts.  That's nice and
>all, but that's not what Klingon adverbials are.  In Klingon, the term
>"adverbial" is applied to a specific subset of the /chuvmey/ (non-nouns,
>non-verbs).

it wasn't me who gave this definition.

>Furthermore, /-Ha'/ is not exactly an adverbial suffix.  Its use on
>adverbials is not predictable: not every adverbial can use it.  There was a
>discussion recently about a list of every allowed "adverbial-Ha'."  If it's
>not on the list, it's not allowed (so far as we know).

ok... i will try to keep on studing this topic before making further 
comments about chuvmey, adverbials and adverbs. anyway, thank you.

>Hopqu' chaH 'ej Hol pImqu' lujatlh, 'ej Qobqu' 'op.
>"They are very far away and speak a very different language, and some of
>them are very dangerous."

thank you.

sts.