[tlhIngan Hol] {net X} vs. {'e' Xlu'}

[De'vID]

On Mon, 13 Jun 2022 at 01:49, Will Martin <lojmitti7wi7nuv at gmail.com> wrote:

> I’m quite surprised that we can place a Sentence As Object between a Main
> Clause and its dependent clause. I saw nothing in TKD that ever suggested
> such a thing.
>
> We’ve seen an example, {‘e’ neHbe’ vav’oy}? where the {‘e’} referred to an
> entire paragraph preceding the statement; something someone else said. So,
> we’ve seen {‘e’} stretch back to refer to context. I’ve never seen it
> encapsulate a clause as object to within the boundary of a larger sentence.
> I really thing that’s a remarkable stretch from anything we’ve seen. I
> consider that to be remarkable to consider that justified.
>

{bIQapqu'meH tar DaSop 'e' DatIvnIS} "To really succeed, you must enjoy
eating poison" (TKW p.73)

The main clause here is {'e' DatIvnIS}. The subordinate clause is
{bIQapqu'meH}. The sentence-as-object {tar DaSop} sits between them.

-- 
De'vID
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20220613/9107fa64/attachment-0002.htm>