[tlhIngan Hol] Type 9-ed verb as SAO

[De'vID]

On Sun, 1 Dec 2019 at 03:42, Hugh Son puqloD <Hugh at qeylis.net> wrote:

> Do we have any canon examples of clauses with verbs taking type-9 suffixes
> which are then used as the object of another verb? For the purposes of this
> question, ignore {-bogh}, {-ghach}, and {-wI'}, as those all turn the verb
> into a noun or make it part of a clause that acts as a noun grammatically.
>

I couldn't find any. I suspect there isn't one because the construction is
not grammatical.


> As an example of what I mean, can any of the sentences mean what the
> accompanying translations say? (I know all of these sentences could be
> rewritten to avoid using this construction, the point is to illustrate it
> in use.)
>

The way I read these is that I expect the {'e'} to refer back to a previous
sentence, which isn't there.


> {bIpawDI' 'e' lutu'} When you arrive they will notice that you arrive
>

For example:
{mIv DatuQtaH, bIpawDI' 'e' lutu'} "when you arrive, they will notice it
[that you're wearing a helmet]"

And even that's slightly weird, and I would've expected this arrangement
instead.
{bIpawDI', mIv DatuQtaH 'e' lutu'}

However, the first sentence could happen in speaking if someone says
"You're wearing a helmet", and mid-sentence, the thought occurs to them
that "Oh, no, when you arrive they'll notice it".


> {vIje'chugh 'e' vIpay} If I buy it I will regret buying it
> {Sulengpa' 'e' bonabnIS} Before you travel you need to plan traveling
> {mayIttaHvIS 'e' wIbuSbe'} While we are walking we don’t focus on us
> walking
>

Another possibility is that the {'e'} refers to a previous unstated
sentence.

Two warriors are out for a walk on the evening before a battle.
Young warrior: {wa'leS may'Daq wIjaH!}
Old warrior: {mayIttaHvIS, 'e' wIbuSbe'.}


> {QapmeH 'e' lunIDnIS} In order for them to succeed they need to attempt to
> succeed
> {Saghqu'mo' 'e' mevbe'} Because she is very serious she doesn’t stop being
> serious
>

I can't help but read all of the {'e'}s as referring to something which
isn't there.

I found that verbs with {-'a'} and {-jaj} seemed a bit weirder when acting
> as SAO, probably because they change the mood:
>
> {DalIjpu''a'? 'e' Datlhoj'a'?} Did you forget it? Did you realize that you
> forgot it?
>

Putting {-'a'} on both makes it harder to understand, but I think this is
equivalent to trying to use a question as if it were a relative pronoun.

{DalIjpu'a'? 'e' Datlhoj} *"You realise that you forget or don't forget
it?" or maybe *"You realise whether or not you forget it, yes or not?"


> {malopjaj; 'e' wItIvjaj} May we celebrate; may we enjoy celebrating
>

{malopjaj 'e' wItIv} *"We enjoy that may we celebrate"

Whether or not these are technically grammatical sentences, I don't think
they make sense.

Or is it the case that SAO has to have a verb without a type nine suffix? I
> won’t do this for all of the above examples, but as an example of a type
> 9-ed verb coming before an SAO pronoun but not being the actual SAO:
>
> {bImob bIpawDI' 'e' lutu'} When you arrive they will notice that you are
> alone
>

I wrote my own completion of your sentence above before reading this
example, but yes, I think this is necessary because without such a verb,
you only have a clause, and not a full sentence.

-- 
De'vID
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20191202/922fc676/attachment-0016.htm>