[tlhIngan Hol] Agreement with pronouns

[Daniel Dadap]

> On Oct 13, 2018, at 11:09, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 19:30, SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name> wrote:
>> Just noticed this line in paq'batlh:
>> 
>> DaH mararchuq
>>     mayIntaHvIS
>>     wa' Dol bIH qa''e' porgh'e' je
>> 
>> We are now connected,
>>     Spirit and body are one,
>>     Until our time comes.
>> 
>> What's of interest is the sentence wa' Dol bIH qa''e' porgh'e' je. This demonstrates clearly that when you've got a "to be" sentence with a topic as well as a noun, the pronoun agrees with the topic, not the first noun. wa' Dol is singular; qa''e' porgh'e' je is plural. bIH is plural. It's not wa' Dol 'oH qa''e' porgh'e' je.
>> 
> I am experiencing {nIbpoH}, the feeling I have done this before...
> 
> [Enterprise explodes]
> 

[Enterprise explodesqa']

>> On Thu, 4 Feb 2016 at 19:36, SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name> wrote:
>> Another interesting tidbit from paq'batlh:
>> 
>> [pe']
>> 
>> First, in the {wa' Dol} line, we have the pronoun agreeing with the 
>> subject but not the object. {wa' Dol} is an {'oH}; {qa''e' porgh'e' je} 
>> are plural.
>> 
>> Second, we know that a {qa'} is capable of using language, but the 
>> combination {qa' porgh je} has gotten the pronoun {bIH}, which indicates 
>> no language ability. A {porgh} is undoubtedly an {'oH}, not a {ghaH}, so 
>> the conjunction of these two "genders" has led to the less 
>> language-capable one controlling the pronoun.
>  
> -- 
> De'vID
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20181013/84f0cf72/attachment.htm>