[tlhIngan Hol] What would you do ?
sustel at trimboli.name
Thu May 30 09:20:40 PDT 2019
On 5/30/2019 11:12 AM, Daniel Dadap wrote:
>> On May 30, 2019, at 10:07, Daniel Dadap<daniel at dadap.net> wrote:
>> But he isn’t doing that. This isn’t a chain of SAOs
> Oops, reading your message again I don’t think you were talking about a chain of SAOs, but two 'e' pronouns referring to the same sentence. But what he wrote is still not what you’re suggesting: the two 'e' pronouns each refer to different sentences.
I think charghwI' was thrown by the odd punctuation.
*DaleghlaH; 'e' Sov /dog/vam, nISwI' Daghaj; 'e' Sov je /dog/vam*
I would have punctuated this like so:
*DaleghlaH 'e' Sov /dog/vam; nISwI' Daghaj 'e' Sov je /dog/vam.*
I recommend to mayqel that he not separate the two sentences of a
sentence-as-object with semicolons. The semicolon is used to show that
two separate sentences are related. In the Klingon SAO, the two
sentences aren't just related; the first sentence is actually dependent
on the second sentence. The first sentence may not even be true,
depending on what the second sentence says about it. (E.g., *jIpuj 'e'
vItem*/I deny that I'm weak./) The relationship between sentences in an
SAO is much closer than a semicolon would suggest.
The semicolon is also a stronger separator than a comma. If you've got a
sentence of the form
WWWW; XXXX, YYYY; ZZZZ.
then a normal reading would suggest you've got three ideas here. Idea 1
is WWWW, idea 2 is XXXX, YYYY, and idea 3 is ZZZZ.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the tlhIngan-Hol