[tlhIngan Hol] Peace.. No peace..

SuStel sustel at trimboli.name
Mon Nov 28 06:48:57 PST 2016

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 

**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 ?



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20161128/51ade058/attachment-0004.htm>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list