[tlhIngan Hol] {neH} and {-bogh}ed nouns

mayqel qunen'oS mihkoun at gmail.com
Thu Feb 27 05:42:07 PST 2020

> qama' neH qIppu'bogh yaS'e' the officer
> who hit only the prisoner
> qama' qIppu'bogh neH yaS'e' the officer
> who merely hit the prisoner
> qama' qIppu'bogh yaS'e' neH only the
> officer who hit the prisoner

ok, I understand these examples, thanks.. But there's still something which
confuses me.

Suppose we wrote:

{qama''e' qIppu'bogh neH yaS}

The first translation which comes to mind, is "the prisoner who has been
merely hit by the officer". But could it be translated too as "only the
prisoner who has been hit by the officer" ?

The reason I'm confused is because I can't stop wondering:

If a construction as {verb-bogh noun} *can* be used as the first "noun" of
a noun-noun construction, then why couldn't we have in the place of a
second noun, just the {neH} acting with the meaning of "only" ?

~ mayqel qunen'oS
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20200227/e85f4beb/attachment-0004.htm>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list