[tlhIngan Hol] What exactly does the {'ej} connect ?

[mayqel qunenoS]

I see..

So, in order to say "the cat that I gave you and the bird of prey that I
sent you", I will say:

{vIghro' Danobbogh toQ DangeHbogh je}

And if I want to say "the cat that I gave you and the bird of prey that I
sent you, are noisy", I will write:

{chuS vIghro' Danobbogh toQ DangeHbogh je}

Would you agree with the above ?

qunnoH
ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'

On 15 Nov 2016 6:22 pm, "André Müller" <esperantist at gmail.com> wrote:

> That might have been the example, yes.
>
> A relative clause is formed with {-bogh} in Klingon, so {paq vIlaDlI'bogh}
> is the book that I am reading. So your sentence is an example of a noun
> {Dargh} with two relativized verbs attached to it.
>
> - André
>
> 2016-11-15 16:56 GMT+01:00 mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun at gmail.com>:
>
>> andre muller:
>> > nouns with relative clauses
>>
>> What is a "noun with relative clause" ? Could you write an example ?
>>
>> andre muller:
>> > Note, that {'ej} can also connect 2 relative clauses:
>> > (X-bogh 'ej Y-bogh Z = a Z which is X and Y), although I cannot find
>> the example right now.
>>
>> Perhaps it is {SuDbogh Dargh 'ej wovbogh}, but I don't remember the
>> source..
>>
>> qunnoH jan puqloD
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 4:42 PM, André Müller <esperantist at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > I think that it's better to remember that {'ej} connects clauses, not
>> just
>> > sentences. The two parts ending in {-taHvIS} are not relative clauses,
>> but
>> > temporal clauses ("while..."), they could also be called converbs
>> ("-ing").
>> >
>> > Linguistically speaking, it is the best to remember that {je} connects
>> noun
>> > phrases (so not just nouns, but also nouns with relative clauses, nouns
>> with
>> > adjectives, pronouns, etc.), and {'ej} connects everything else (though
>> not
>> > everything).
>> >
>> > We have to remember that MO didn't write TKD for a linguistic audience
>> and
>> > that he didn't always use extremely precise unambiguous terminology. So
>> when
>> > he says sentences in this case, he might actually mean clauses, or
>> verbs, or
>> > verbal phrases. Canon examples show when {'ej} is used.
>> >
>> > Note, that {'ej} can also connect 2 relative clauses: (X-bogh 'ej
>> Y-bogh Z =
>> > a Z which is X and Y), although I cannot find the example right now.
>> >
>> > - André
>> >
>> > 2016-11-15 13:51 GMT+01:00 mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun at gmail.com>:
>> >>
>> >> hmm.. I see..
>> >>
>> >> so, at the sentence {jIyIttaHvIS 'ej jISoptaHvIS, vIghro' vIgho'}, the
>> >> {'ej} *does* connect two sentences:
>> >>
>> >> sentence one: {jIyIt}
>> >> sentence two: {jISop}
>> >>
>> >> the {-taHvIS} just creates relative clauses out of these sentences.
>> right
>> >> ?
>> >>
>> >> qunnoH
>> >> ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 15 Nov 2016 1:29 pm, "De'vID" <de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> On 15 November 2016 at 12:18, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>> > De'vID;
>> >>> >> Note the part that says {lengtaHvIS... 'ej charghtaSvIS}.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > maj. this answers my question, and shows that the {'ej} is indeed
>> able
>> >>> > to join two "parts of a sentence" (I don't know how else to call
>> >>> > them).
>> >>>
>> >>> Subordinate clauses. See TKD 6.2.2.
>> >>>
>> >>> > and -correct me if I'm wrong-, according to this canon example we
>> >>> > could write too: {qaleghmeH 'ej qa'uchmeH, jIlengta'} for "in order
>> to
>> >>> > see you and in order to hold you, I traveled". Also, we could write
>> >>> > {qaleghDI' 'ej qa'uchDI' jIQuchchoH} for "as soon as I saw you and
>> as
>> >>> > soon as I held you, I became happy"
>> >>>
>> >>> Correct.
>> >>>
>> >>> > however, this does contradict the "strict description" of {'ej},
>> that
>> >>> > "it is used to join sentences". Unless of course, what I've been
>> >>> > calling "parts of a sentence" are considered to be true sentences..
>> >>>
>> >>> You're thinking about this the wrong way.
>> >>>
>> >>> {'ej} *is* joining two sentence: {loghDaq leng} and {qo'mey Sar
>> chargh}.
>> >>>
>> >>> By applying {-taHvIS} to the verb of a sentence, it becomes a
>> >>> subordinate clause. And what's the verb of the compound sentence
>> >>> {loghDaq leng 'ej qo'mey Sar chargh}? It has two verbs: {leng} and
>> >>> {chargh}.
>> >>>
>> >>> There's no contradiction here. There's an unstated (and I think pretty
>> >>> intuitive) rule that if a sentence is compound, the verb suffixes
>> >>> apply to all the relevant verbs.
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> De'vID
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> 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
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20161115/40ee459b/attachment-0017.htm>