De'vID:
{SuvwI'mo' qIpbogh yaS} {SuvwI' qIpbogh yaSmo'} Are these ambiguous?
You're right. They aren't ambiguous. The {SuvwI'mo' qIpbogh yaS} means "because of the warrior who was hit by the officer", and the {SuvwI' qIpbogh yaSmo'} means "because of the officer who hit the warrior". I realize now, that the "job" which is done by the {'e'} as far as the marking of the head noun is concerned, can be done by any other type-5 noun suffix, so my problem is solved ! I think that our good captain, had witten this somewhere in the grammarian's desk too. However I had forgotten all about it, until I read your examples. thanks ! qunnoH jan puqloD On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 3:59 PM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
On 13 December 2016 at 11:54, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
De'vID:
Why do you need both {-'e'} and {-mo'}? Why is {-mo'} by itself not sufficient?
I didn't know that !
So, if I correctly understand your point, if I write {bortaSmo' chIwbogh tIghvam} this would mean "because of the revenge this custom epitomizes", right ?
What else could it mean?
This is ambiguous: {SuvwI' qIpbogh yaS} "the officer who hit the warrior" or "the warrior who was hit by the officer"
Now look at the following: {SuvwI'mo' qIpbogh yaS} {SuvwI' qIpbogh yaSmo'}
Are these ambiguous?
-- De'vID _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org