tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Sep 28 12:32:51 2007

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

grammar question: verbs used adjectivally

McArdle ([email protected])



SuvwI' quv:

The way I read TKD, verbs used adjectivally can't
carry any suffix other than a rover (e.g., {qu'})
and/or a type 5 suffix transferred from the noun {e.g.
{vaD}).  Is this correct?

It would be enormously useful if other verbal suffixes
were permitted, as in for example:

  *{meqmey potlhlaw'mo'} "for seemingly important
reasons"

I suspect this is just wishful thinking on my part,
but I thought I'd ask.

Incidentally, I also read TKD as prohibiting the use
of a type 5 suffix on the head noun of a relative
clause, so you couldn't express the same idea this way
either:

  *{potlhlaw'bogh meqmeymo'} "for reasons that seem
important"

Is this another of those cases, like "the ship in
which he fled", where the English syntax just isn't
transferrable to Klingon?  What kind of workarounds
are possible?

Savan

mI'qey


       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC





Back to archive top level