tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Dec 24 05:23:11 2007
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: "to-be" + <<-bogh>>
Alan Anderson (email@example.com)
> The only reason we are deciding that Klingon relative clauses
> are restrictive is because the English translations come out that way.
TKD page 63: "The noun modified by a relative clause is the head
noun." The words "modified by" are obviously describing Klingon
relative clauses as restrictive/essential. The words "described by"
instead (or in addition) would have implied the nonessential
interpretation, but such implication is not found.