tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Dec 07 06:42:31 2007

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: Prefix and noun agreement

David Trimboli (david@trimboli.name) [KLI Member] [Hol po'wI']



Alan Anderson wrote:
> ja' SuStel:
> 
>> Alan Anderson wrote:
>>
>>> The odd thing is that I don't have a big problem treating it as a
>>> first person subject when the verb prefix asks me to.
>> That *is* odd. What would you make of this:
>>
>>     qorDu' reghom qorDu'
> 
> I'd have to get some inflection or body language help in order to be  
> sure, but my first reaction at the end of the sentence is a  
> combination of confusion and irritation at having been posed such a  
> syntactic puzzle. :)

Between your response and those of Qov and naHQun, my impression is that 
everyone is trying to figure out what I meant, and overlooking whether 
they think it's *right*.

Considering the minor confusion it and other constructions like it have 
caused (and given my strong distaste for it!) I can't help but think 
that non-agreeing prefixes can't be normal usage. I don't like the idea 
of claiming that a rule works, but only if you can make sense of it. 
Especially when the rule goes against the rulebook in the first place.

I am, frankly, disappointed that so many are apparently considering this 
sort of thing to be generally correct.

SuStel
Stardate 7933.2





Back to archive top level