tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Jun 20 13:29:38 2009

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: Once more into the ship in which I fled

McArdle (mcardle09@yahoo.com)





--- On Sat, 6/20/09, Rohan F <qeslagh@hotmail.com> wrote:

> From: Rohan F <qeslagh@hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Once more into the ship in which I fled
> To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
> Date: Saturday, June 20, 2009, 11:48 AM
> 
> 
> MO: In fact it shouldn't! I don't think Klingon fits into
> this hierarchy. Well,
> it does, if you want to look at it that way. I couldn't
> make the {­bogh} thing
> work for me with anything other than subject or object.
> 

If this statement is to be believed, there must have been a time when MO _wanted_ Klingon to support relative clauses with non-core head nouns.  I wonder if he ever considered the type of solution I proposed, and, if so, why he rejected it.  It certainly seems (IMHO) to be one way to "make the {bogh} thing work".

Qapla'




      






Back to archive top level