[tlhIngan Hol] to roar in crescendo with verbs

mayqel qunen'oS mihkoun at gmail.com
Sat Feb 19 07:27:52 PST 2022

> DI'onmeyna'Daj 'agh 'aghqu' 'aghchu' is
> grammatical and has three clauses. What
> SuStel meant is that the interpretation
> where all verbs are part of the same
> sentence is not grammatical (I'm not sure
> why that is relevant).

So that's what's happening! Finally I understand, thanks.

> In this case, «DI'onmeyna'Daj 'agh,
> 'aghqu', 'aghchu'» would make clear that
> the verbs form different sentences (and
> are indeed verbs and not nouns/names,
> which one could think if assuming that
> they are all part of one clause).

I'm glad to be reading this, because this answers the next thing I was
about to ask.

I was wondering why there's no similar problem with the original Ca'Non
sentence of {beyHom bey bey'a' jachtaH}. And reading your reply I
understand, that the reason there's no problem with the {beyHom bey bey'a'
jachtaH} is that in this case we have nouns which can only be understood as
part of the main sentence.

However, since in the {'a qaStaHvIS yInDaj DISmey, DI'onmeyna'Daj 'agh
'aghqu' 'aghchu'} the thing repeated is a verb instead of a noun, one could
wonder whether each {'agh} applies to the {qaStaHvIS yInDaj DISmey} or not.

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/20220219/baf49236/attachment-0002.htm>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list