tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Aug 31 22:17:22 2013

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Klingon Word of the Day: naj

Robyn Stewart ( [KLI Member] [Hol po'wI']

I don't think so, because 'eD is fluent in English and feels that the
English main clauses are being interrupted too.  

It's a good point ghunchu'wI' has, though, that QIppu'bogh isn't the
relative clause. QIppu'bogh yaS is, so there's nothing actually left
afterwards for it to interrupt. To 'eD the yaS is the important bit and he's
waiting impatiently for the QIppu'bogh to get out of the way, but for me
QIppu'bogh is at least as important. It has to have a head on it so I know
who has been stupid, but mulegh QIppu'bogh yaS/nuv/Sa'/lagh/ghot. muleghbej

- Qov

-----Original Message-----
From: ghunchu'wI' [] 
Sent: August 31, 2013 9:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Klingon Word of the Day: naj

On Sep 1, 2013, at 12:21 AM, "Bellerophon, modeler"
<> wrote:

> Regardless of how the sentences feel, they are interrupted by the relative
clauses {QIppu'bogh} and "who has been stupid."

I think you have misunderstood what a "relative clause" is. Your examples
are incomplete, consisting only of the verb and the relative suffix/pronoun.
To be a complete clause, there must also be a noun that the verb describes.
The full Klingon relative clause is {QIppu'bogh yaS}.

I too have never thought of the verb part of a relative clause as
"interrupting" the main clause. It's just part of the noun phrase.
Similarly, I get no sense of interruption from {jej ghojmeH taj} or {'ugh
baS 'In}. They are more complex than {jej taj} and {'ugh 'In}, certainly,
but they still flow without any need to put the sentence on hold when
dealing with an intrusive element.

Maybe it's a fluency thing.  

-- ghunchu'wI' 
Tlhingan-hol mailing list

Tlhingan-hol mailing list

Back to archive top level