On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 2:06 PM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
ghunchu'wI':
{ret} alone, without being preceded by an actual specifier of a time period, is very odd.
I know. Because of that reason in the original sentence I wrote {'op ret}.
Do you understand the sentence you quoted? Do you know what "time period" means? {'op} just means "some, an unspecified amount". It isn't a time period like {rep} or {Hogh}. {'op ret} "some ago" is not a complete idea.
ghunchu'wI':
You could add {DIS}, or you could replace it with {ben}, to be "some years ago"
The way I understand words similar to {ret}, they need to be preceeded or followed by something expressing a number (either a number or law'/puS/'Iq etc).
You have misunderstood. {ret} and {pIq} need to be preceded by something representing a *period of time*.
So, how can we write {DIS ret} ? Or even worst use {ben} on its own ?
You use them the way you thought a bare {ret} works. Quantify them with a count before them, or with a numberlike verb after them.
ghunchu'wI':
In any case, the word {Hoch} ought to go either before or in place of the noun it is referring to.
Because of this reason, I placed it before the {wa'} which was used as noun. I chose this because of the canon example "kill one of them I don't care who". (I don't remember it exactly at the moment)
{wa' yIHoH} "Kill one (of them)." It's an example of using a number as a noun, and it counts an amount of something which is already part of the discussion. What you're trying to do is very different. You aren't counting "one" of anything. Again, {wa'} doesn't work as a translation of the indefinite pronoun "one". The simplest fix for this phrase is just to say {nuv} where you tried to put {wa'}. -- ghunchu'wI'