[tlhIngan Hol] {Dam} in reference to verbs instead of nouns

[SuStel]

On 4/30/2021 7:58 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
> {Dam} lubopbogh cha' Ca'Non mu'tlhegh tu'lu':
>
> HumanvaD 'urwI' wIDam
> we treat the human as a traitor
>
> 'urwI' ghaH 'e' vIDam
> I consider him (to be) a traitor
>
> cha' mu'tlheghvam DInuDchugh, vaj matlhoj: DIp ('urwI') lo' Hoch 
> mu'tlheghvam. 'a mu'tlheghDaq DIp tu'lu'be'chugh, 'ej wot tu'lu'chugh, 
> vaj jaSHa' {Dam} lo'laH'a' nuv?
>
> jIqon:
>
> Dun SuvwI'vam 'e' vIDam
> I consider this warrior to be great
>
> lugh'a' {Dam} lo'vam?


Think of *Dam* as meaning /SUBJECT considers SOMEONE/SOMETHING to be 
OBJECT./ Exactly how that someone or something is identified depends on 
how you construct the sentence. In *HumanvaD 'urwI' wIDam,* you're using 
an indirect object to say /We (subject) consider the human (someone) to 
be a traitor (object). /In *'urwI' ghaH 'e' vIDam,* you're using a 
separate sentence to identify whom you're talking about, saying /I 
(subject) consider him (someone) to be-traitor (object)./

So apply this same idea to your proposed sentence: /I (subject) consider 
this warrior (someone) to be-wonderful./ It follows the same pattern. It 
works.


-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20210430/f5d1bb7b/attachment-0015.htm>