SuStel:
> But based on TKD, wanI'vam lajQo'
> wa' probably means one (of them) won't
> accept this event—in other words, it
> presupposes the listener already knows
> about a group, out of which you're singling
> one.
I understand. now that you mention it, the idea for using the {wa'} this way, came from the canon example {wa' yIHoH}, which talks about singling one out of a group.
thank you for explaining this !
qunnoH
ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 11/9/2016 10:43 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
> wanI'vam lajlu'Qo
I wrote this in order to say "someone refuses to accept this event".
Could I write instead {wanI'vam lajQo' wa'} ? Can the {wa'}, "stand alone" in order to mean "one person/someone" ?
Yes. See TKD 5.2: "Numbers are used as nouns. As such, they may stand alone as subjects or objects or they may modify another noun." But based on TKD, wanI'vam lajQo' wa' probably means one (of them) won't accept this event—in other words, it presupposes the listener already knows about a group, out of which you're singling one. It's not the same as vay' or -lu'.
I think wanI'vam lajlu'Qo' is the superior sentence, and better translated this event won't be accepted.
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org