[tlhIngan Hol] Peace.. No peace..

[mayqel qunenoS]

hmm.. I see..

Is it possible to have a construction like this ?
{... 'Iv/nuq neH}
i.e. a question where the {'Iv/nuq} aren't placed at the beginning of
a sentence (as in the {nuq Datlhutlh DaneH}), but right before the
{neH} ?

and something else.. are there legal QAO's which utilize the {'e'} ? I
can't think of an example right now.

qunnoH jan puqloD



On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 4:48 PM, SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name> wrote:
> On 11/28/2016 4:33 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
>
> SuStel:
>
> nuq wIta' boneH?
> Okrand has done this, in TalkNow!: nuq Datlhutlh DaneH what do you want to
> drink?
> This isn't necessarily license to use any question-as-object, but it seems
> that simple
> substitutions like this work.
>
> how do we define "simple" ? where does the simple stop and the complex
> begins ? what do you mean by "simple substitutions" ?
>
>
> 'Iv and nuq. They simply plug in where the answer goes.
>
> The other question words don't work like this. There's a case to be made for
> 'ar, if you consider the noun and the question word together as a unit:
>
> *HIq 'ar Datlhutlh DaneH
> how many ales do you want to drink?
>
> This seems perfectly reasonable to me.
>
>
> ghunchu'wI':
>
> If a Question As Object actually asks a question, it is not usually a
> problem.
>
> hmm.. this is interesting. but again the problem (for me) is how to
> define the "If a Question As Object actually asks a question". This
> sounds more as something that the reader is expecting/knowing in
> advance, rather that a QAO unambiguously being translated as a QAO and
> nothing else.
>
> As weird as this may sound, I can't learn grammar; never could..
> grammar terms confuse me. So, let me try to make a rule out of this
> and correct me if I'm wrong:
>
> SuStel's {nuq wIta' boneH} and 'oqranD {nuq Datlhutlh DaneH}, have the
> following structure: the object of the {neH} is a question, and the
> answer to that question can be placed as an object to the {neH}.
>
>
> Actually, I don't think that's what's happening. The whole combined sentence
> is a question. The questioning part is nuq and the rest of the sentence is
> Datlhutlh DaneH.
>
> Consider the creation of a normal question. Start with the answer:
>
> 'Iw HIq Datlhutlh
>
> Now assume you don't know what the answer is... hide it:
>
> ??? Datlhutlh
>
> Now use a question word in its place:
>
> nuq Datlhutlh
>
> So do the same thing with a sentence-as-object:
>
> 'Iw HIq Datlhutlh DaneH
> ??? Datlhutlh DaneH
> nuq Datlhutlh DaneH
>
> At no point in the process was there ever a standalone question, nuq
> Datlhutlh. The substitution acts on the pre-existing sentence-as-object
> construction. This isn't really a question-as-object; it's just a question
> in which the nuq stands in for the answer as it always does.
>
>
> So, in the original post could I have written: {chay' tlhIHvaD mavang
> boneH} for "how do you want us to act ?"
>
>
> With neH this becomes uncertain, because it's unclear whether the chay' is
> attached to the object or the main clause. Let's look at this with 'e'
> instead.
>
> *chay' tlhIHvaD mavang 'e' bolegh
>
> This is supposed to be asking how you saw us acting toward you. But chay'
> does not perform a simple substitution. This is confusing the English how as
> a conjunction with how as an adverb.
>
>
> Suppose I write:
>
> {chay' tlhIHvaD mavang? 'e' yIngu'}
> how do you want us to act ? specify it !
> or
> {chay' tlhIHvaD mavang? maHvaD 'e' yIngu'}
> how do you want us to act ? for us you specify it !
>
> would these be acceptable ?
>
>
> No.
>
> --
> SuStel
> http://trimboli.name
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
>