<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="">The limits of the weight that a Relative Clause can carry has been deeply explored, and the answer always comes back that if the Relative Clause isn’t easily understood, use two sentences, instead. {DaH be’ leghtaH loD. be’vam paq blahblahblah} or {DaH be’ leghtaH HoD. loDvam paq blahblahblah}.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">In your wildest dreams, Okrand might explain that in examples like you are imagining, the {-‘e’} belongs to the Relative Clause and not the Noun-Noun construction, so that if you zoom out to the Noun Noun construction, compressing the Relative Clause into its Head Noun, the {-‘e’} is thereby consumed and no longer counts in the Noun-Noun construction, so it doesn’t break the rule.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Until that happens, rules is rules, and you can use your construction and maybe be speaking gibberish. Or Klingon. We can’t know.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div class="">
<meta charset="UTF-8" class=""><div dir="auto" style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); 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; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div>pItlh</div><div><br class=""></div><div>charghwI’ ‘utlh</div><div>(ghaH, ghaH, -Daj)</div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
<div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Oct 31, 2021, at 11:30 AM, <a href="mailto:luis.chaparro@web.de" class="">luis.chaparro@web.de</a> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class=""><div style="font-family: Verdana;font-size: 12.0px;" class=""><div class="">In a noun-noun construction *noun* actually means *noun phrase*, so that we can have noun-noun constructions with nouns + adjectival verbs or relative clauses, right?</div>
<div class=""> </div>
<div class="">*be' val paq* - the book of the intelligent woman</div>
<div class="">*DaH be' vIleghtaHbogh paq* - the book of the woman I'm seeing now</div>
<div class=""> </div>
<div class="">However, in TKD it's stated that in a noun-noun construction only the second noun can take a Type 5 suffix (well, I suppose it would be better to say *only the last noun*, since noun-noun constructions with multiple nouns / noun-phrases are possible). But since *-'e'* is a Type 5 suffix, how could we disambiguate this sentence?:</div>
<div class=""> </div>
<div class="">*DaH be' leghtaHbogh loD paq* - the book of the man who is seeing the woman now / the book of the woman the man is seeing now</div>
<div class=""> </div>
<div class="">Putting *-'e'* on *be'* or *loD* wouldn't be allowed. Or is there an exception?</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=""></div></body></html>