[tlhIngan Hol] Noun-noun constructions with relative clauses

[mayqel qunen'oS]

charghwI':
> If you argue that as a matter of style, the
> language needs to bend to your will

I'm afraid you misunderstood me.

I wasn't asking for something to change; I was just expressing that (to me)
it seems strange that the grammar forbids something, which at the same time
indirectly allows.

The grammar forbids the addition of {-'e'} in the first noun of a {-bogh}
clause (in an example as the above), but at the same time the same language
allows for us to understand that {-bogh} clause as if the same {-'e'} that
it forbids, existed.

Just seems strange, is all.

--
Dana'an
https://sacredtextsinklingon.wordpress.com/
Ζεὺς ἦν, Ζεὺς ἐστίν, Ζεὺς ἔσσεται· ὦ μεγάλε Ζεῦ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20211109/e5ed531d/attachment-0002.htm>