tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed May 26 17:55:08 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: core semantic case roles: agent, patient, focus

qurgh ([email protected])

• From: [email protected]
• Subject: Re: core semantic case roles: agent, patient, focus
• Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 19:47:38 -0400
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
• References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
• User-agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.3

ghItlh David Trimboli <[email protected]>:
> I disagree.  It *does* make sense to say things like {yIDoq}, but we are
> told by Okrand in KGT that Klingon doesn't work that way: it requires
> {yIDoq'eghmoH}.  This is an arbitrary feature of the language, not one that
> is required for it to make sense.

Ok, you say it requires {yIDoq'eghmoH}. My questions are:

Is {yIDoq} grammatically allowable?
What rule does Okrand give us in KGT that tells us that to order someone to
change their colour requires {-eghmoH} on the verb?

I'm just trying to understand the grammar covering these strange orders. :)

qurgh


--------------------------------------------------------------------
For a free wizage.net web based email address, email me!

• References:
  • core semantic case roles: agent, patient, focus
    • From: [email protected]
  • Re: core semantic case roles: agent, patient, focus
    • From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
  • Re: core semantic case roles: agent, patient, focus
    • From: "...Paul" <[email protected]>
  • Re: core semantic case roles: agent, patient, focus
    • From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: action verbs vs. qualities
• Next by Date: Re: core semantic case roles: agent, patient, focus
• Previous by thread: Re: core semantic case roles: agent, patient, focus
• Next by thread: Re: core semantic case roles: agent, patient, focus
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level