tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jul 19 08:16:05 2005
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: comparative as question
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: [email protected]
>In a message dated 7/19/2005 7:56:13 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>[email protected] writes:
>> >But now that you've suggested it:
>> >raSvam'e' raSvetlh'e' je, nuq tIn law' latlh tIn puS?
>>
>> I like it. I *really* like it.
>>
>> Savan,
>>
>> QeS lagh
>>
>'e' vIparHa'qu' je jIH.
>lay'tel SIvten
'ach vIparqu'. I don't have any problem with the
{raSvam'e' raSvelth'e' je} part, but the rest just looks
wrong. The {latlh} seems the wrong choice: ?"which one
is the big one, the other is the small one". I'd
repeat the {nuq} if I was going to use this: ?"which one
is the big one, which one is the small one". Mixing an
interrogative and a positive like this just looks weird.
That initial {nuq} seems wrong, too. I realize that
it can fit in the N slot, since it's a noun, but it's
really being used like an adjective: "as for this table
and that table, _which one_ is the big one...". And we
know from MO's past comments that you can't use {nuq}
with an adjectival meaning like that. This is what
led him to come up with the {X yIngu'} formula, because
you couldn't use {nuq} to mean "which?".
I sent an alternative at the beginning of this thread that
I don't think ever made it to the list. If it did, I
apologize for repeating myself. How about:
tIn raSvam. 'ach tInqu''a' raSvetlh?
-- ter'eS