[tlhIngan Hol] Type 9-ed verb as SAO

De'vID de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com
Mon Dec 2 06:27:40 PST 2019

On Mon, 2 Dec 2019 at 14:51, Hugh Son puqloD <Hugh at qeylis.net> wrote:

> On Dec 2, 2019, at 03:39, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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.
> Thanks for checking. I’m not surprised that there are no examples to be
> found, as I share your suspicion.
> What’s your take on what the referent is for the SAO pronoun in {'e'
> neHbe' vavoy} from TUC? I really doubt it’s the actual previous sentence as
> a whole ({QamvIS Hegh qaq law' torvIS yIn qaq puS}) because it doesn’t make
> a whole lot of sense for the late chancellor to have not wanted that
> comparison to be true, which is how I would interpret {'e'} actually
> replacing that whole sentence. So I suspect that in this case {'e'} is
> either replacing a part of the previous sentence (which part is understood
> from context), or it’s replacing a previous sentence as a whole other than
> the immediately preceding one (likely {DIHIvlaHtaHvIS DaH DIHIvnIS}), or
> it’s just referring to some contextually understood “that” which everybody
> in the conversation is already aware of.
> My current thinking is it’s most likely referring to the {DIHIvnIS}, which
> is still not a usage that the description in TKD supports.

Really? That's like 5 lines before the {'e'}, including a line also spoken
by Azetbur, according to my transcript:

GENERAL #1: DIHIvbe'chugh qo'chajDaq toywI''a' DImoj.
GENERAL #2: [completely flubbed line]
AZETBUR: ghu'maj Dayajbe'law', Sa'.  notlh veS 'a tugh manotlhchoH je maH.
GENERAL #1: QamvIS Hegh qaq law' torvIS yIn qaq puS.
AZETBUR: 'e' neHbe' vavoy.

I think it's much more likely to be referring to an implicit {maQamtaHvIS

"A is better than B"
"But that (i.e., A) is not what daddy wanted."

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20191202/d1f16b40/attachment-0004.htm>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list