DaH naDev jIHtaHbogh meq Saja'." /Now I will tell you why I am here./
if the {naDev jIHtaHbogh} is indeed a noun, them I believe this resembles the "ship in which I fled" problem. if we accept the {naDev jIHtaHbogh} as a noun, then obviously by the same reasoning we need to accept {Duj jInarghbogh} as a noun too, unless the {naDev} is the object of {jIHtaHbogh}, thus producing "the here which I am being". of course in star trek everything is possible, so perhaps someone can change state of being thus from a humanoid becoming a place.. but then again the english translation doesn't say "now I will tell you why I became the here". qunnoH jan puqloD ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' On 17 Dec 2016 10:31 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
On 12/17/2016 1:40 PM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
ok, I read it; {jIHtaHbogh naDev vISovbe'}.
however based on what I know, I can't analyze it. "here which I am being I don't know it". shouldn't the {naDev} always come first ? and what is its role in that sentence ? is it the subject of the {jIHtaHbogh}, the object of {vISovbe'}, or both ?
as I wrote earlier in this thread, I am obviously missing something here, and by the looks of it, it must be something pretty important..
I've never heard a satisfactory analysis of the sentence either. But Okrand obviously has one to use the *jIHtaHbogh* word more than once.
-- SuStelhttp://trimboli.name
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org