tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jan 04 10:41:02 2007
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Purpose Clauses (was Re: "conjunction"?)
On Jan 4, 2007, at 12:30 PM, ...Paul wrote:
> I'd like to sum up the discussion around purpose clauses, in a
> non-partisan way...
> However, since it is unwieldy to define a term that then changes
> based on
> usage, it seems more... convenient (for lack of a better term) to
> craft a
> noun phrase that does NOT change on usage, such as /rarbogh mu'/ --
> which
> remains the same if you're saying /rarbogh mu' yIlo'/ or /mu'tlhegh
> DararmeH rarbogh mu' Dalo'nIS/...
>
> That's my argument in a nutshell, all circling back to the original
> point
> -- what do we call a conjunction? :)
chuvmey.
> ...Paul
>
> ** ...Paul, [email protected], Insane Engineer **
> ** Visit Project Galactic Guide http://www.galactic-guide.com/ **
> "Understanding human needs is half the job of meeting them"
> -- Adlai Stevenson
Doq