[tlhIngan Hol] qaStaHvIS in a sao

[mayqel qunenoS]

It is not that the {-'e'} on the {romuluSnganpu'} is "close" to the {'e'}
of the sao, which troubles me.

It is another thing which puzzles me..

If the {qaStaHvIS DIS 'Iq} precedes the {'e'} of the sao, then will the
{'e'} of the sao continue to refer to the {jaghpu' chaH romuluSnganpu''e'},
or will it refer to the {qaStaHvIS DIS 'Iq} instead ?

I mean if the {qaStaHvIS..} directly precedes the sao, then the "thing
which we believe" will still be "that the romulans are enemies" or the
"during too many years" ?

~ nI'ghma

On Dec 1, 2017 16:34, "Steven Boozer" <sboozer at uchicago.edu> wrote:

> Why not move the time stamp – in this case a time subordinate clause – to
> the beginning of the sentence where we usually see it?
>
>
>
>   qaStaHvIS DIS 'Iq jaghpu' chaH romuluSnganpu''e' 'e' wIHar
>
>   For too long we believed that the Romulans were enemies.
>
>   We believed the Romulans were enemies far too long.
>
>
>
> Though {-‘e’ ‘e’} does look odd, I admit.
>
>
>
> --Voragh
>
>
>
> *From:* nI'ghma
>
> If we want to say "while too many years are happening, we believed that
> the romulans are enemies", then do we write:
>
>
>
> {jaghpu' chaH romuluSnganpu''e'; qaStaHvIS DIS 'Iq 'e' wIHar}
>
>     or
>
> {jaghpu' chaH romuluSnganpu''e'; 'e' wIHar qaStaHvIS DIS 'Iq}
>
>
>
> Can the {qaStaHvIS DIS 'Iq} in the example above, precede the {'e'} of the
> sao ?
>
>
>
> ~ nI'ghma
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20171201/d76a5112/attachment-0002.htm>