[tlhIngan Hol] {vaj} the english "so" and joining multiple {-bogh} phrases by {vaj}

D qunen'oS mihkoun at gmail.com
Fri Jul 22 07:44:41 PDT 2022

> yaS HoHpu' bombogh yan 'ej ghIq ngabbogh
> That adverbial is trying to pull the disappearing action into a period of
time after the sword killed the officer, but
> you're also trying to use the relative clause to describe the sword that
kills the officer. There's nothing ungrammatical
> about doing this, but you're confusing yourself because you're trying to
imagine the sword that disappears
> in the future being used to kill someone in the past. The ngIq is meant
to refer back to the killing, but it's conjoined
> with the singing. One would be quite justified in reading it this way:

Ok, this is important. As it seems, there's something here I've been
ignoring for years.. (Let's remove the {-pu'} to make this simpler).

Up until now, I was under the impression that the *only* thing that {yaS
HoH bombogh yan 'ej ghIq ngabbogh} can mean is "the officer is killed by
the sword which sings and then disappears." Meaning that there is a sword
which sings and then disappears, and it is that particular sword which
kills the officer.

But reading your comments, I understand that this sentence can have another
meaning too: "the officer is killed by a sword which sings; and after the
killing is done this sword disappears".

Is my understanding correct? Can the {yaS HoH bombogh yan 'ej ghIq
ngabbogh} have both these meanings?

(Of course it isn't something I'd actually use, but -as always- I'm trying
to understand how things work).

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/20220722/47fc873f/attachment-0004.htm>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list