[tlhIngan Hol] paq'batlh mu'tlhegh

[mayqel qunenoS]

yes, you're right.

I obviously confused you, because of my previous comments. here's what
happened:

De'vID wrote that the {naDev jIHtaHbogh} is a noun. However I wasn't (and
still am) unable to accept that.

In order for a {-bogh} clause to be able to be considered a noun, then that
noun has to be either a subject, or an object of the verb which carries the
{-bogh}.

{muqIpta' yaS}
the officer who hit me

{paq qanobta'bogh}
the book which I gave you

When De'vID wrote that the {naDev jIHtaHbogh} is a noun, I wrote that the
only way this can take place is if the {naDev} is considered to be the
object of the {jIHtaHbogh}. But if that was true, then the translation
could only be "the here which I am being".

Unless if it is possible, for a locative word like {naDev} to be considered
an object. but noone here has ever taught me that this is possible.

And how could it be ? If it was possible, then at the sentence {naDev,
qama' qIp yaS} "here the officer hits the prisoner", we would have two
objects before the verb thus producing object-object-verb-subject (which is
illegal). And of course, noone can say that the {naDev} is a beneficiary
since it carries no {-vaD}, and it isn't affected from the action.

So, until someone is able to explain to me this matter in a logical and
meaningful way, I will continue to believe that there is no way we can
explain this baq'batlh sentence by the grammar we know so far.

qunnoH jan puqloD
ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'

On 18 Dec 2016 1:18 pm, "Brian Cote" <wearetheinformation00 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Slightly beside mayqel's point, but in the phrase {naDev jIHtaH} /I am
> here/ (see TKD 27-28pp), the {naDev} is implicitly locative, right? So it
> can never mean /I am the here/(?) It should be considered {naDev[Daq]
> jIHtaH} grammatically, although the {-Daq} is never written explicitly in
> this case. That is correct, right?
>
> QImSIr
>
> On Sunday, December 18, 2016, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > 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
>>>
>>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20161218/18a30bf0/attachment-0016.htm>