<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/22/2018 11:58 PM, Daniel Dadap
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:B78EFC5B-FE12-486E-B85B-C46E8741C8C4@dadap.net">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<br class="">
<div><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Dec 22, 2018, at 7:56 PM, SuStel <<a
href="mailto:sustel@trimboli.name" class=""
moz-do-not-send="true">sustel@trimboli.name</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8" class="">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/22/2018 9:01 PM, Daniel
Dadap wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:5C7FD1F0-3E91-42E3-A1E0-CAFA578B578E@dadap.net"
class="">
<div class="">The original thing I was asking about was
part of a relative clause so I wanted to simplify the
example but I guess I made it too simple and omitted
an actual indirect object which was the point of the
prefix trick. The clause was “Sep vIDellu'bogh” which
I used in the sentence:</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">pa' Sep'e' jInajtaHvIS vIDellu'bogh tu'lu'</div>
<div class="">Over there there is a region that was
described to me while I was dreaming</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">(There are probably other problems with
this sentence; I wasn’t sure where to place the
jInajtaHvIS, for example, which is also why I wanted
to simplify the example.)</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="">Yes, the <b class="">jInajtaHvIS</b> makes it
way too complicated... probably even without considering
the prefix trick. It might make grammatical sense with
the <b class="">jInajtaHvIS</b> between the <b
class="">pa'</b> and <b class="">Sep'e'</b> or after
the <b class="">vIDellu'bogh,</b> but at this point I'd
be worried about the listener's ability to parse the
nested clauses.</p>
<p class="">If we drop the dreaming bit for now, and show
the sentence without the prefix trick, we have</p>
<blockquote class="">
<p class=""><b class="">pa' jIHvaD Sep Dellu'pu'bogh
tu'lu'<br class="">
</b><i class="">The region which was described to me
is thereabouts.<br class="">
</i>(Notice that the <b class="">-pu'</b> is
required; the describing is already done.)</p>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>I know the dreaming part has been removed for simplicity
here, but can the frame of reference not be the dream? In the
context of the dream, if you’re thinking of the -taHvIS part,
the describing isn’t necessarily completed.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>I suppose -pu’ captures the “once” meaning from the
original sentence I was aiming for: “there’s a land that I
dreamed of once in a lullaby”.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>The frame of reference for this sentence, that is, the viewpoint
from which it is being spoken, is after the describing is
completed, but while the region is still thereabouts. That's what
makes <b>Del</b> need a <b>-pu'.</b> Being thereabouts is not a
completed action.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:B78EFC5B-FE12-486E-B85B-C46E8741C8C4@dadap.net">
<div><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">
<blockquote class=""> </blockquote>
<p class="">I don't see why the prefix trick wouldn't work
here, again with the caveat that we've never seen the
prefix trick on a verb with an indefinite subject:</p>
<blockquote class="">
<p class=""><b class="">pa' Sep vIDellu'pu'bogh tu'lu'<br
class="">
</b><i class="">The region which was described to me
is thereabouts.</i><br class="">
</p>
</blockquote>
<p class="">If I had to put the dreaming back in, and if I
had to keep it all in one sentence, I'd probably do it
like this:</p>
<blockquote class="">
<p class=""><b class="">pa' Sep vIDellu'pu'bogh
jInajtaHvIS tu'lu'<br class="">
</b><i class="">The region which was described to me
while I was dreaming is thereabouts.</i><br class="">
</p>
</blockquote>
<p class=""><br class="">
</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>Yeah, two sentences would obviously have been easier. My
two sentence version of this was: “jInajtaHvIS Sep vIDellu’;
pa’ Sepvam tu’lu’.”</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>With the exception of needing <b>-pu'</b> on <b>vIDellu',</b>
this is much easier to follow.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:B78EFC5B-FE12-486E-B85B-C46E8741C8C4@dadap.net">
<div>Anyway, if a -taHvISed verb isn’t a time stamp, that’s good
to know. And I guess it isn’t, because when you add an object,
something like “jIHaghqu'taH paqvetlh vIlaDtaHvIS” doesn’t sound
wrong.</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Dependent clauses using <b>-DI', -vIS, -chugh, -pa',</b> and <b>-mo'</b>
can go either before the main clause or after it.</p>
<p>Dependent clauses can describe a time, but they're not the sort
of "time expression" being referred to by TKD. What that means is
a grammatically unmarked phrase referring to the time.</p>
<p>For example, from TKD:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><b>cha yIbaH qara'DI'<br>
qara'DI' cha yIbaH<br>
</b><i>Fire the torpedoes at my command!</i><br>
</p>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</body>
</html>