tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Dec 01 13:35:04 2009

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Numbers with pronouns

ghunchu'wI' 'utlh (

On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 3:51 PM, David Trimboli <> wrote:
>  > Just to be sure, though: there isn't
>> anything in canon that precludes the use of an adverb with a verbal
>> pronoun; it just seems odd?
> Not that I'm aware of. It does seem odd, though, and lacking any
> examples, I would avoid it.

The extreme oddness is probably due to the fact that {nItebHa'
maHtaHvIS} has neither an object nor a locative, which are the only
two ways TKD describes how to use a pronoun in the sense of "to be".
The closest thing I can get from this phrase is "Acting in concert,
while we 'be'..." No, it really doesn't work. The obvious intent is
{matay'taHvIS} "while we are together". For example, from TKW page

  {wa' Dol nIvDaq matay'DI' maQap}
  "We succeed together in a greater whole."

In general, adding adverbials or time stamps or other
appropriately-marked nouns at the beginning of a "to be" sentence
doesn't seem wrong to me: {SuSmo' reH qoH ghaH} "He is always a fool
because of the wind," or the canon {DaHjaj SuvwI' SoH} "Today you are
a warrior." It's when the sentence *lacks* the pieces described in TKD
that it falls short of conveying a proper meaning.

-- ghunchu'wI'

Back to archive top level