<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="">This shouldn’t be a grammatical problem at all. I do wonder whether it should be {romuluS yaS} or {romuluSngan yaS}, though. We’d be more likely to say {tlhIngan yaS} than to say {Qo’noS yaS}, after all.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Unlike some Type 9 verb suffixes, {-meH} needs to precede the noun or verb it modifies, so in this case, it can’t be misinterpreted as applying to anything before the semicolon. I’m omitting commentary on punctuation...</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">It’s never been suggested that a {-meH} clause could modify the pronoun {‘e’}, so it has to apply to the main verb, {vIqaSmoH}.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I know you said that you know it could be rephrased, and you aren’t interested in that, but I honestly think it would be cleaner, simpler, and more direct to just say:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">{qaQaHmeH romuluSngan yaS vIcheHmoHta’.}</div><div class=""><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div class="">It just seems weirdly redundant to say that you caused it to happen that you caused X. That’s a bigger issue for me than your question about whether or not {-meH} clauses can precede {‘e’}. We’ve seen other beginning-of-sentence stuff show up before {‘e’}. {-meH} is not special in this regard.</div><div 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; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;"><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">charghwI’ vaghnerya’ngan<br class=""><br class="">rInpa’ bomnIS be’’a’ pI’.</div>
</div>
<div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Mar 10, 2020, at 10:09 AM, mayqel qunen'oS <<a href="mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com" class="">mihkoun@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="auto" class=""><div dir="auto" class="">Could someone use a construction like the following ?</div><div dir="auto" class=""><br class=""></div><div dir="auto" class="">romuluS yaS vIcheHmoHta'; qaQaHmeH 'e' vIqaSmoH </div><div dir="auto" class="">I caused the romulan officer to defect; in order to help you I caused that to happen </div><div dir="auto" class=""><br class=""></div><div dir="auto" class="">And yes, I know that I can rephrase, but the problem (or my problem anyway..) is whether we can have a {-meH} clause before the {'e'} of a sao.</div><div dir="auto" class=""><br class=""></div><div dir="auto" class="">~ mayqel qunen'oS</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>