<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class="">I didn’t say that it was ungrammatical because I don’t believe that it’s ungrammatical. I think it’s misguided, because I don’t think the meaning is as clear as it sounds like the original poster wanted it to be, and I think that, like I said, it is something you can get away with in conversational speech on rare occasions, but if you somehow latch onto the idea that this is fine, this is normal, this is well-constructed, then you are mistaken for the very reason that it made the original poster uncomfortable, and for the same reason that SuStel was less than enthusiastic about endorsing the practice.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The missing pronoun that acts as subject of the second verb is functioning the same way as the pronoun {‘e’} functions in a Sentence As Object construction. It represents the previous sentence.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">This is not ungrammatical. It’s merely hideous, when it tries to formalize a general rule of what is okay to do, when Klingon has no such rule.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I mean, if you can just imagine a pronoun that can act as subject of the second sentence and represent the first sentence, why not just imagine a pronoun acting as object of the second sentence that represents the first sentence? Poof! No need for {‘e’} or {net}. Any sentence can just be invisibly represented by any unstated pronoun acting as subject or object in the following sentence.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">That path leads to chaos.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">So, I repeat, it is not ungrammatical. It is merely hideous. You can’t rely on your reader/listener to consistently realize, “OH, I GET IT. THAT UNSTATED SUBJECT OF THE SECOND VERB REPRESTENTS THE ENTIRE PREVIOUS SENTENCE. WHAT A GREAT IDEA? WHY DIDN’T OKRAND THINK OF THAT?</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Am I clear yet?</div><br class=""><div class="">
<div dir="auto" style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;">charghwI’ vaghnerya’ngan<br class=""><br class="">rInpa’ bomnIS be’’a’ pI’.</div><div style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;" class=""><br class=""></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
<div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Mar 27, 2019, at 11:13 AM, nIqolay Q <<a href="mailto:niqolay0@gmail.com" class="">niqolay0@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 11:03 PM SuStel <<a href="mailto:sustel@trimboli.name" class="">sustel@trimboli.name</a>> wrote:<br class=""></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">
<div class="gmail-m_-5993294336747423285moz-cite-prefix">On 3/26/2019 9:08 PM, nIqolay Q wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">I<span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"> admit that it
doesn't appear to</span> be a very common construction, but with
four <span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">canonical </span>examples
(<span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">four and a half,
maybe, with</span> <b class="">rIntaH</b>), I can't agree that it's
ungrammatical.<span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"> </span></blockquote><p class="">Who said it's ungrammatical?<br class=""></p></div></blockquote><div class=""><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class="gmail_default">charghwI''s post definitely gave me the impression that he thought it was ungrammatical, although he managed to not use that specific word.<br class=""></div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class="gmail_default"><br class=""></div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class="gmail_default">Well, if nothing else, it was nice to read paq'batlh again.</div></div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">tlhIngan-Hol mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org" class="">tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org</a><br class="">http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org<br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></body></html>