tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jun 22 02:20:10 2004
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: mIvDaq yIH
- From: "QeS lagh" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: mIvDaq yIH
- Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 19:19:21 +1000
- Bcc:
ghItlhpu' SuStel:
>Or it's an exception, or an error. Languages aren't always exacting in
>their rules, but the rules represent the general case. "When the noun-noun
>construction is used, only the second noun can take syntactic suffixes
>(Type
>5)" (TKD p. 31). Don't take one example and cheerfully throw out a rule of
>TKD.
'e' vIneHbe'. boqchuqbogh cha' DIp vIleghbe'qu'; wot ngabmoHbogh vIlegh:
{telDaq wovmoHwI'mey (tu'lu'bogh)}. mojaqmo' boqchuqbogh cha' DIp vIleghbe'.
I wasn't planning on it, and even if I were, I wouldn't be doing it
cheerfully. I hadn't interpreted this as a noun-noun construction, but a
sentence with an elided verb: {telDaq wovmoHwI'mey (tu'lu'bogh)} "lights
(which are found) on the wing". I didn't even think about interpreting it as
a noun-noun construction, mainly *because* of the suffix {-Daq}.
>A rule may be broken without disproving the rule in general.
jIHvaD qay'law'taH. reH pabbe' *Okrand* mu'tlhegh 'e' vIlIj 'ej jIlIjtaH.
'ach *Wiki*Daq {toQDuj nagh beQ} chovnatlh vIchelbej; Soj'e'
ja'chuqlu'taHvIS potlhtaH 'e' vIHar.
I keep forgetting that canon doesn't always conform perfectly to the rules.
Nevertheless, I'm still going to add the BoP example to the Wiki; it's still
important to the discussion of {X-Daq Y}.
qatlho', SuStel, 'ej Savan.
QeS lagh
_________________________________________________________________
Get a Virgin Credit Card and win an adventure:
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;8661322;9498324;s?http://www.promo.com.au/virgincreditcard/firstbirthday/track.cfm?source=N92