[tlhIngan Hol] doubly {-meH}ed nouns

[SuStel]

On 5/14/2019 1:52 PM, Jeffrey Clark wrote:
> On May 14, 2019, at 11:33, SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name 
> <mailto:sustel at trimboli.name>> wrote:
>
>> On 5/14/2019 11:21 AM, Jeffrey Clark wrote:
>>>> On May 14, 2019, at 10:05, mayqel qunen'oS<mihkoun at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> However, the intended meaning was "I will present for the chancellor a
>>>> thinning training program".
>>>>
>>>> Then, based on the "romulan hunter-killer probe" Ca'Non, the thought
>>>> entered my mind to write:
>>>>
>>>> {QangvaD, qeqmeH 'ej langmeH mIw vImuch}
>>>> I will present for the chancellor a process in order to train and in
>>>> order to thin
>>> In this construction, how does one differentiate between something with two purposes versus a purpose that is serving another one? Or does one just rely on context?
>>>
>>> Because it could be a process for training that also will make him thin (but the training is it’s own purpose and lacks a direct causal link to the thinning), or it could be a process that trains him with the explicit purpose that the training makes him thin.
>>
>> The *'ej* gives the game away. It has to connect two verbal clauses 
>> of the same type, which means they can't be modifying each other. The 
>> only possible conjunction here is between the *qeqmeH* and the 
>> *langmeH,* so there's no chance that *qeqmeH* is modifying *langmeH.*
>>
>> I wouldn't want to construct a sentence where one purpose clause 
>> modifies another purpose clause. Start nesting clauses too deep and 
>> they become hard to understand.
>>
>
> What you say follows my intuition, but the example provided seems to 
> counter this.
>
> The sentence above {qeqmeH ‘ej langmeH} implies that the process is to 
> train and to thin the chancellor as dual purposes (equality of 
> purpose) — however my understanding is that the intent is that the 
> training is causal to the thinning. A causal relationship seems like 
> it should be {langmeH qeqmeH mIw} — “for the purpose of thinning, a 
> processing for training”.

A Romulan hunter-killer probe is a *romuluSngan Sambogh 'ej HoHbogh 
nejwI',* but the killing is dependent on the finding, yet they are given 
equal billing in the sentence. It's a probe that finds and a probe that 
kills, but neither of these functions is independent of the other.

A dieting program is a procedure for training and a procedure for being 
thin. Neither function is independent of the other.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190514/43c879ef/attachment.htm>