tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Dec 16 15:16:26 2007
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: jIHtaHbogh naDev vISovbe'
ja' SuStel:
> Which means that "The restaurant where we ate," an illustrative
> example
> that is not translated, explained, or shown in any canon, cannot be
> used
> to support the notion that relative clauses inherently include any
> kind
> of locative sense.
I didn't mean to imply that relative clauses can automatically form
locatives. I'm just pointing out that TKD says a relative clause can
be translated using the relative pronoun "where". In concert with
TKD's previously given explanation of how relative clauses are
translated into English, I think this "illustrative example" is
enough support to consider {maSoppu'bogh Qe'} to be a grammatically
proper Klingon phrase.
Maybe I'm misinterpreting what you mean by "locative sense". The
restaurant phrase is a noun described by a relative-clause-marked
verb, and would still need {-Daq} in order to function as a locative
in a larger sentence. {jIHtaHbogh naDev} does not, but I agree that
it's because of the word {naDev} and not because of the {-bogh}.
-- ghunchu'wI'