[tlhIngan Hol] expressing "first"

SuStel sustel at trimboli.name
Mon Nov 15 06:54:51 PST 2021

On 11/15/2021 9:42 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
> In the paq'batlh we have:
> {wa'DIch Hegh moratlh} for "first, morath fell".
> Suppose now we want to say "we didn't attack them first", meaning "we 
> were not the ones who attacked first".
> Based on the paq'batlh example, would it work if we wrote {wa'DIch 
> DIHIvpu'be'}?

I believe in the /paq'batlh/ sentence, *wa'DIch* isn't so much modifying 
a verb adverbially as it is acting as a sort of disconnected preamble. 
Imagine it this way:

*wanI' wa'DIch: Hegh moratlh*/First event: Morath dies./

I have no proof that this is what is happening, but I think it more 
likely than for ordinals to be considered pure adverbials. That is, I 
don't think *wa'DIch* is being used to mean "in the manner of being 
first." If this is correct, then your proposed sentence doesn't work.

Here's one reason to think I may be right. Elsewhere in /paq'batlh/ we 
see *wa'DIch nach 'ay' / cha'DIch ghIv 'ay' / wejDIch burgh 'ay', *etc. 
These ordinals are acting in exactly the same was as in *wa'DIch Hegh 
moratlh,* but they aren't modifying any verbs. They make perfect sense 
if you think of them as saying: /first rite: the form of the head / 
second rite: the form of the legs and arms / third rite: the form of the 
stomach,/ etc.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20211115/da28b515/attachment-0003.htm>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list