tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Mar 06 17:25:28 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: -bogh
From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
> From: <[email protected]>
> > > But what if I was talking about the "he" who hit the
> > > officer?
> > >What if I wanted to say, "He who hit the officer, fled?"
> > >
> > > Haw'pu' yaS qIppu'bogh.
>
> I'm sure this would always be interpreted as "The officer
> who had been hit fled."
>
> My own preference with this question is always to use
> an explicit noun (not even a pronoun).
>
> Haw'pu' yaS qIppu'bogh loD'e'.
> The man who had hit the officer fled.
>
> If it's not a /loD/ you're talking about, substitute your
> noun of choice.
>
> > Personally I would introduce "then" to show order
> > of action and said:
> >
> > yaS qIppu'bogh ghIq Haw'pu'
>
> [...]
> > I believe the natural translation should be "He who
> > hit the officer then fled". But I think you are right
> > and you would need the subject of fled specified . . . .
>
> I hope I've snipped without losing your context.
>
> If what you're trying for is "He who hit the officer and
> then fled," where both hitting the officer and fleeing
> have the head noun of "he," then you have incorrectly
> used /ghIq/ as a conjunction.
I didn't plan on an "and" in there and used [ghIq] as an adverb to [Haw'pu']
"Then, he fled".. Have I used that incorrectly? Or do I need the ['ej]
between the sentences and it just happens to force an "and" into the English
translation. Sorry I should look that up myself when I can but I may be back
to you.
> Here's how I would say
> that, including my use of an explicit noun:
>
> yaS qIppu'bogh loD'e' 'ej ghIq Haw'pu'bogh
> the man who had hit the officer and then had fled
For this meaning I can see that but the "and" in there make me feel
something is missing , like another sentence. I was thinking of it as what
he did after the hitting took place, no more. Maybe I'm getting tied up in
the English and not the tlhIngan. I assume the 2nd [-bogh] is there because
of the way this is parsed but does it have to be there in every use of
[-bogh].
> This is just a very long noun phrase, and could
> be used in a sentence:
>
> tuH yaS qIppu'bogh loD'e' 'ej ghIq Haw'pu'bogh.
> The man who had hit the officer and then had
> fled was ashamed.
>
> Remember to use /-bogh/ on every verb that
> needs it; you can't elide it as you might elide
> the equivalent in English.
I honestly didn't think it applied to the "fled" part although it is likely
I would of missed that if I had.. Thanks for the step up.
> SuStel
> Stardate 2178.3
qe'San