De'vID:
Saying {jIH mayqel} is like saying "Me Tarzan". It'll be understood, but it's not grammatical.
thank you for replying ; however what you wrote, contradicts SuStel's input which is the following : SuStel :
A Klingon to-be sentence expresses the idea X = Y. 'elaDya'ngan jIH me = Greek; mayqel jIH me = Michael. There is no a, an, or the in Klingon."
if X=Y, then Y=X right ? furthermore, SuStel wrote.. SuStel :
You should more or less ignore the ideas of subject and object with regard to to-be sentences.
I can understand ignoring the ideas of subject and object with regard to to-be sentences ; but how placing the {mayqel} after the {jIH} is able to produce "me michael" ? Since in to-be sentences X=Y and vice versa, if {jIH mayqel} produces "me michael", then {mayqel jIH} must produce the same result too. right ? I am confused now ; just as I was beginning to understand.. On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:39 PM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
On 22 June 2016 at 09:01, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
Since one can say {mayqel jIH} and {jIH mayqel} for "I am michael",
lughbe' qechvam.
Saying {jIH mayqel} is like saying "Me Tarzan". It'll be understood, but it's not grammatical.
-- De'vID _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org