On 7/8/2019 9:59 AM, Will Martin wrote:
I don’t get {‘e’ vIwIvmo’.} SAO, as I’ve always understood it, consists of two complete sentences linked by the pronoun. The second sentence here is a dependent clause. Maybe this is just informal speech, but it seems ungrammatical, as if this is proper grammar for answering a question, but I’m not sure that’s the case.
Consider in English the difference between two answers to “Why are you sad?”:
1. "Because my nephew just died."
2. “My nephew just died.”
The first version doesn’t add any meaning, and it’s not really grammatically complete. Any answer to a “Why” question is already known to be a reason, so you don’t need to begin it with “Because…”
There is plenty of evidence to show that when TKD speaks of "sentences," it really refers to any verbal clause. /paq'batlh/ has examples of using *'e'* in a dependent clause. *qeylIS Qaw’ ‘e’ nIDmeH yerDaj weH molor ‘ej juH qachDaj meQmoH* /Molor did not destroy Kahless// // By burning his house// // Or ravaging his lands./* * *Hoch qImmoH mu’meyDaj** ** ghob ‘ach ‘ej val** ** yIntaH ‘e’ luleghmo’ chaH mer* All were bemused by his words, Wise and full of spirit, And astonished to see him alive. *le’yo’raj nIHlu’ta’mo’ penoD jatlh qeylIS** ** nuHmeyraj tIQorgh** ** watlh ‘Iwraj ‘e’ lu’aghmo’ nuHmey jej* /About avenging their stolen pride,// // About caring for their weapons,// // For they represent the purity of their blood./ *jatlh ‘e’ mevDI’ qeylIS, lop** ** chaq tugh batlh Heghmo’** ** ‘ej chaq tugh charghmo’* /After Kahless’s words, they celebrate, For they may soon die with honor! For they may soon be victorious!/ *veqlarghvo’ narghbogh loD chutDaj bIv ‘e’ ngIlbogh loD DaH pongDaj Sov qotar * /Now Kotar has the name Of the one who eluded Fek’lhr, And dared to defy his rules. / I'll stop here. There are undoubtedly more. Now, if you're concerned that the dependent clause is never followed up by a main clause, I'd just chalk that up to informal speech, as you suggest. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name