[tlhIngan Hol] Placement of the qatlh

[SuStel]

On 2/18/2019 9:59 AM, Lieven L. Litaer wrote:
> Am 18.02.2019 um 15:53 schrieb SuStel:
>> Imagine you instead asked, /Why do I need to feed your cat if I help 
>> you?/
>>
>>     *qaQaHchugh, qatlh vIghro'lIj vIje'nIS?
>>     qatlh vIghro'lIj vIje'nIS, qaQaHchugh?*
>
> You have just interchanged the chugh-part, which is not allowed with 
> meH-clauses.

Intentionally, to more clearly illustrate the boundaries between 
clauses. The main clause remains the same, and if we can move the 
/if-/clause we can see where the boundaries of the main clause are.


> There is at least one canon example of placing {qatlh} in the middle 
> of a sentence. But isn't there a difference between a {-chugh} 
> sentence and a purpose clause? (I'm seriously asking)

A difference, yes, but does the difference put the purpose clause inside 
the main clause, while other subordinate clauses remain outside of the 
main clause? I'm not convinced of that.

How about this: *jagh DajeymeH nIteb yISuvrup*/In order to defeat the 
enemy, be ready to fight alone./ Adverbials come at the beginning, 
barring time expressions. Yet the purpose clause comes first in this 
sentence. *qatlh* is basically just a question form of an adverbial. Why 
isn't it *nIteb jagh DajeymeH yISuvrup?*

But I can also supply a counterargument. *vaj malopmeH tlhIHvaD nob 
SaSuqpu'* /So to celebrate, I've gotten you all a gift./ (Hallmark 
commercial) Here, the adverbial *vaj* is placed before the purpose clause.

So I don't think there's an exact answer here.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190218/d8807579/attachment-0015.htm>