tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Mar 01 11:00:47 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

• Index by Date
• Index by Thread
• Index by Author

Re: RE: Segh Soch mojaq <<-pu'>>

Quvar ([email protected])

• From: Lieven L. Litaer (Quvar) <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: RE: Segh Soch mojaq <<-pu'>>
• Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 19:55:32 +0100
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>

Am 01.03.2004 14:04:03, schrieb "QeS lagh" <[email protected]>:

>I don't object to this. It looks OK from my (admittedly not very 
>experienced) point of view. (Maybe it just sounds weird because there are a 
>whole bunch of <pu'>s in it, but nothing's wrong with it grammatically that 

It feels weird to me not because of all the {-pu'}, but because I feel uncomfortable using a pronoun like 
a verb.
One other thing, the standard structure of "A is B" is {B 'oH A'e'}

TKD 6.3:
<<<
If the subject is a noun, it follows the third-person pronoun ({ghaH} "he/she," {'oH} "it," {chaH} 
"they," {bIH} "they") and takes the {-'e'} "topic" suffix.
>>>
  {puq ghaH loD'e'} - surely correct.
  {puq ghaHbogh loD'e'} - probably correct.
  "the man who is the child"

  {puq'e' ghaHbogh loD} - correct?.
  "the child who the man is"

Now I look back at TKD 6.3 and get confused with the placement of {-'e'}. On the other hand, I 
remember there was something with -bogh and the topic marker -'e'...

Quvar.
qaponQo' - HIpon SoH.

• Prev by Date: Re: Pun?
• Next by Date: Re: chuv
• Previous by thread: Re: Pun?
• Next by thread: RE: Segh Soch mojaq <<-pu'>>
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level