tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Nov 03 13:11:01 2009

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Sentences as objects

Terrence Donnelly ( [KLI Member]

I expect Voragh will have many examples bearing on your questions.

--- On Tue, 11/3/09, Tracy Canfield <> wrote:

> I'm guessing that you can use these in two sentences: 
> jagh jeylu'.
> vIQIjpu'.  "The enemy was defeated.  I explained
> it."  for an equivalent to
> "I explained that the enemy was defeated."

I've also used { vIQIj. jIjatlh. jagh jeylu'.}

> 4.  Verbs of wanting
> TKD shows that neH takes a sentence object without using a
> complementizer
> such as 'e' or net:
> want    neH
> jIQong vIneH
> Do these verbs work the same way?
> hope    tul
> prefer    maS

I'm pretty sure that only {neH] works this way (I explain it to myself by positing that {neH} is on its way to becoming a suffix: *{vISopneH}). 

> * In many cases, including English, these "sentence
> objects" take forms that
> wouldn't be allowed in a standalone sentence - we say "He
> goes" but "I want
> him to go".  Since none of these forms have Klingon
> equivalents that I know
> if, I'm trying to avoid getting sidetracked into
> non-Klingon grammar.

Just wanted to point out that you can definitely say "I want him to go" in Klingon: {ghoS (ghaH) vIneH}.

-- ter'eS 

Back to archive top level