[tlhIngan Hol] paq'batlh mu'tlhegh

[mayqel qunenoS]

> DaH naDev jIHtaHbogh meq Saja'."
> /Now I will tell you why I am here./

if the {naDev jIHtaHbogh} is indeed a noun, them I believe this resembles
the "ship in which I fled" problem.

if we accept the {naDev jIHtaHbogh} as a noun, then obviously by the same
reasoning we need to accept {Duj jInarghbogh} as a noun too, unless the
{naDev} is the object of {jIHtaHbogh}, thus producing "the here which I am
being".

of course in star trek everything is possible, so perhaps someone can
change state of being thus from a humanoid becoming a place.. but then
again the english translation doesn't say "now I will tell you why I became
the here".

qunnoH jan puqloD
ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'

On 17 Dec 2016 10:31 pm, "SuStel" <sustel at trimboli.name> wrote:

> On 12/17/2016 1:40 PM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
>
> ok, I read it; {jIHtaHbogh naDev vISovbe'}.
>
> however based on what I know, I can't analyze it. "here which I am being I
> don't know it". shouldn't the {naDev} always come first ? and what is its
> role in that sentence ? is it the subject of the {jIHtaHbogh}, the object
> of {vISovbe'}, or both ?
>
> as I wrote earlier in this thread, I am obviously missing something here,
> and by the looks of it, it must be something pretty important..
>
>
> I've never heard a satisfactory analysis of the sentence either. But
> Okrand obviously has one to use the *jIHtaHbogh* word more than once.
>
> --
> SuStelhttp://trimboli.name
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20161218/f86ea32c/attachment.htm>