On 5/30/2019 11:12 AM, Daniel Dadap wrote:
On May 30, 2019, at 10:07, Daniel Dadap<daniel@dadap.net> wrote:
But he isn’t doing that. This isn’t a chain of SAOs Oops, reading your message again I don’t think you were talking about a chain of SAOs, but two 'e' pronouns referring to the same sentence. But what he wrote is still not what you’re suggesting: the two 'e' pronouns each refer to different sentences.
I think charghwI' was thrown by the odd punctuation. *DaleghlaH; 'e' Sov /dog/vam, nISwI' Daghaj; 'e' Sov je /dog/vam* I would have punctuated this like so: *DaleghlaH 'e' Sov /dog/vam; nISwI' Daghaj 'e' Sov je /dog/vam.* I recommend to mayqel that he not separate the two sentences of a sentence-as-object with semicolons. The semicolon is used to show that two separate sentences are related. In the Klingon SAO, the two sentences aren't just related; the first sentence is actually dependent on the second sentence. The first sentence may not even be true, depending on what the second sentence says about it. (E.g., *jIpuj 'e' vItem*/I deny that I'm weak./) The relationship between sentences in an SAO is much closer than a semicolon would suggest. The semicolon is also a stronger separator than a comma. If you've got a sentence of the form WWWW; XXXX, YYYY; ZZZZ. then a normal reading would suggest you've got three ideas here. Idea 1 is WWWW, idea 2 is XXXX, YYYY, and idea 3 is ZZZZ. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name