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

SuStel sustel at trimboli.name
Thu Jun 27 06:04:04 PDT 2019

On 6/27/2019 2:46 AM, De'vID wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Jun 2019 at 15:25, SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name 
> <mailto:sustel at trimboli.name>> wrote:
>     On 6/26/2019 9:17 AM, Lieven L. Litaer wrote:
>>     Am 26.06.2019 um 14:48 schrieb mayqel qunen'oS:
>>>     Out of curiosity, since I can't think of an example..
>>>     Lets say we have a {-bogh} phrase, e.g. {bartIq leghbogh vIghro'}.
>>>     Is there a rule which prohibits, one of the nouns having a
>>>     type-5, e.g.
>>>     {-'e'}, **and** at the same time the other noun having a type-5
>>>     too, e.g.
>>>     {-mo'}, {-Daq}, {-vo'}, {-vaD} ?
>>     I don't know such a rule:
>>     {bartIqDaq bachbogh vIghro'mo' jIHagh.}
>>     Why not? 
>     I think what he means is that the type 5 suffixes apply to the
>     relative clause as a whole, not to noun phrases added to the
>     relative clause.
>     For instance, you can say *bartIqDaq leghbogh vIghro' jIba'*/I sit
>     on the branch that the cat sees./ The *-Daq* on the head noun
>     turns the entire relative clause into a locative.
>     What mayqel seems to be asking is whether you could add another
>     type 5 to the other noun in the relative clause and also have that
>     apply to the main clause. For instance, *bartIqDaq leghbogh
>     vIghro'mo' jIba'.* I don't think this works, because it would make
>     the relative clause, which is a noun phrase, have multiple
>     syntactic roles, which is generally forbidden.
> Not sure if this works or not, but it's not immediately obvious to me 
> why it doesn't:
> qeylIS'e' lIjlaHbe'bogh vay'vaD gha'tlhIq vIbom.
> I will sing an ode of respect for the one who cannot forget KAHLESS.

It doesn't work because *-'e'* in a relative clause makes the noun it's 
attached to the head noun of the clause. I don't think you get to choose 
whether it means head noun or emphasis.

When *-'e'* is performing its role as marking emphasis, it's not really 
working as a syntactic marker, and is only technically a type 5 suffix. 
If you could choose emphasis over head noun marker, then your sentence 
would work, but it wouldn't really be an example of what mayqel is 
asking about.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190627/b172470b/attachment-0005.htm>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list