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

[SuStel]

On 6/12/2022 8:44 AM, Will Martin wrote:
> What you’ve written is not grammatically valid. You can’t put a 
> Sentence As Object in the middle of a larger sentence. The {-‘e’} 
> always refers back to a preceding sentence, not to an encapsulated 
> one. One is forced to have the {-‘e’} skip back to the previous 
> sentence, not place the previous sentence into the middle of the 
> larger sentence. Like I said, it’s ugly.
>
>
>> On Jun 11, 2022, at 3:43 PM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com> wrote:
>> {QuchchoH Hoch, tlhIngan Hol ghojlu'chu' 'e' chavlu'chugh}

This sentence is perfectly grammatical. It consists of a main clause 
(*QuchchoH Hoch*/everybody becomes happy/) and a subordinate clause 
(*tlhIngan Hol ghojlu'chu' 'e' chavlu'chugh*/if one achieves learning 
Klingon perfectly/). The subordinate clause in turn consists of a 
subordinated clause (*'e' chavlu'chugh*/if one achieves that/) whose 
object pronoun's antecedent (*tlhIngan Hol ghojlu'chu'*/one learns 
Klingon perfectly/) comes just before it. That's the rule: the 
antecedent of *'e'* or *net* comes immediately before the clause 
containing that object.

*'e'* must refer to the previous independent clause, not the phrase that 
immediately follows the previous full stop. Again, when Okrand says 
"sentence" in TKD, this must be read as "verbal clause." Okrand was not 
publishing a book as specific as you'd like it to be.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20220612/60bdbe11/attachment-0015.htm>