tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Sep 18 09:36:28 2009
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: Relative clause in a relative clause
- From: Steven Boozer <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: Relative clause in a relative clause
- Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 11:34:38 -0500
- Accept-language: en-US
- Acceptlanguage: en-US
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <[email protected]>
- Thread-index: Aco4ecQcgBEhgWCuS9W3f5osh9inSAAAxRJw
- Thread-topic: Relative clause in a relative clause
qurgh:
>> Doch cho'angbogh vISov 'e' vIHar
>> I believe I know the thing you show me
lay'tel SIvten:
>You could shorten {vISov 'e' vIHar} to {vISovlaw'}. It's not exactly the
>same, but OTOH, is "Har/believe" a genuine belief, or merely equivalent
>to "I think" or even "perhaps"?
I agree about {Har} "believe". Our sole example is:
qaHarbe'; bo'Dagh'a' Dalo'
I don't believe you; you're using a big scoop
(i.e. "You're exaggerating") KGT
You could also say {... 'e' vIQub} "I think that...":
st.k 7/01/97: All four words asked about ... can be used in the construction {S 'e' V}, where S is a sentence, {'e'} is the pronoun (that) which refers to a previous topic (in this case S), and V is one of the verbs listed above (as well as some others). If the sentence (S) is {tlhIngan Hol Dajatlh} "you speak Klingon", it's OK to say... {tlhIngan Hol Dajatlh 'e' vIQub} "I think that you speak Klingon"
How this differs from {tlhIngan Hol Dajatlhlaw'} is unclear. (An unspoken thought vs. a belief perhaps?)
--
Voragh
Canon Master of the Klingons