[tlhIngan Hol] to roar in crescendo with verbs

SuStel sustel at trimboli.name
Fri Feb 18 05:10:30 PST 2022

See my notes on punctuation.
-------- Original message --------From: mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun at gmail.com> Date: 2/18/22  7:03 AM  (GMT-05:00) To: tlhingan-hol at kli.org Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] to roar in crescendo with verbs jIH:> qanchoHtaHvIS nuv, choHbe'; not choHbej vay'. > 'a qaStaHvIS yInDaj DISmey, DI'onmeyna'Daj 'agh 'aghqu' 'aghchu'SuStel:> I wouldn't have any problem with someone stacking verbs> this way in speech, but I wouldn't necessarily call it grammaticalI'm afraid I can't understand this.In the {DI'onmeyna'Daj 'agh 'aghqu' 'aghchu'} sentence, the {DI'onmeyna'Daj} is the object of the {'agh}, and the subject of {'agh} is an omitted {vay'}. Can't the following verbs {'aghqu'}/{'aghchu'} have an omitted {DI'onmeyna'Daj}/{vay'} as object/subject?I understand the reasoning why just writing {qaStaHvIS yInDaj DISmey, DI'onmeyna' 'aghtaH} is better, but I can't understand why the original sentence could be considered ungrammatical. I'm wondering whether there's something I'm missing regarding omitting subjects/objects.-- Dana'anhttps://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/20220218/47a1862a/attachment.htm>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list