tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jan 04 19:05:50 2007

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Purpose Clauses (was Re: "conjunction"?)

...Paul ([email protected]) [KLI Member] 

On Thu, 4 Jan 2007, Alan Anderson wrote:
> ja' ...Paul:
>> Did I miss any examples?
>
> Yes.
>
>   ja'chuqmeH rojHom
>
> This is the prototypical example.  It is translated such that it
> doesn't appear to be a "conjugated" verb; like the other similar
> examples, it seems not to have a pronominal prefix at all.

Are you referring to the sentence in TKD?  The full sentence there is:

ja'chuqmeH rojHom neH jaghla'

Oh, wow, I *just* noticed Okrand says /ja'chuqmeH rojHom/ "is the 
object..."  But I'm still uncertain about including this as an example, 
because if the subject of /ja'chuq/ is "they", then the 0-prefix is 
expected.  Context here actually produces ambiguity; if the sentence was 
spoken between people who are third party to the events, it's a 0-prefix 
-- "The enemy commander wants a truce so they may confer".  If it's being 
spoken between members of one of the parties, they I agree, because I 
would expect it to be /maja'chuqmeH/ "so *we* may confer".

Definitely potential for more ammunition, but the ambiguity makes me 
hesitate to use it to "prove" the theory.

>   ghojmeH taj
>
> The lack of prefix is clear.  "Knife for the purpose of learning."  I
> see it as stronger than an indefinite subject -- it's *no* subject.

Is this in the KGT?  I didn't see it.  Also, (more importantly, IMHO), is 
it used in a sentence?  /ghojmeH taj/ has the same problem as /pe'meH taj/ 
if it's not used in a sentence; as a fragment, I don't think we can infer 
whether or not it would properly have a proper prefix when used in a full 
contextual sentence (ie. we have no evidence its proper use wouldn't be 
something like /DaghojmeH taj Dalo'nIS/)

And again, I reiterate; I think the theory is sound for explaining the 
canon, I just hesitate promoting this uncertain use of the language...

...Paul

          ** ...Paul, [email protected], Insane Engineer **
   ** Visit Project Galactic Guide http://www.galactic-guide.com/ **
            If it's not the same, it should be different.

Back to archive top level