[tlhIngan Hol] two type-5 on a {-bogh} phrase

[terrence.donnelly]

Since when has any suffix besides -'e' been legal on either  noun which is the subject or object of a relative verb? Did Okrand change his statement that he couldn't make it work as anything but subject or object and I missed it?ter'eSSent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------From: SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name> Date: 6/27/19  8:08 AM  (GMT-06:00) To: tlhingan-hol at lists.kli.org Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] two type-5 on a {-bogh} phrase 
    On 6/27/2019 9:00 AM, Daniel Dadap
      wrote:
    
    
      
        On Jun 27, 2019, at 01:46, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com> wrote:

qeylIS'e' lIjlaHbe'bogh vay'vaD gha'tlhIq vIbom.

      
      Why not {qeylISvaD lIjlaHbe'bogh vay'}?
    
    These mean very different things.
    Assuming we are allowed to use -'e' for emphasis in a
      relative clause, which I am not convinced we are, we have
    qeylIS'e' lIjlaHbe'bogh vay'vaD gha'tlhIq vIbom
      I sing an ode of respect to someone who has not forgotten
        KAHLESS (as opposed to someone who has not forgotten someone
        else).
    qeylISvaD lIjlaHbe'bogh vay' gha'tlhIq vIbom
      I sing an ode of respect to Kahless the Unforgettable.
    
    -- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name
  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190627/8e43776b/attachment.htm>