Since when has any suffix besides -'e' been legal on either noun which is the subject or object of a relative verb? Did Okrand change his statement that he couldn't make it work as anything but subject or object and I missed it?ter'eSSent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone -------- Original message --------From: SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> Date: 6/27/19 8:08 AM (GMT-06:00) To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] two type-5 on a {-bogh} phrase On 6/27/2019 9:00 AM, Daniel Dadap wrote: On Jun 27, 2019, at 01:46, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote: qeylIS'e' lIjlaHbe'bogh vay'vaD gha'tlhIq vIbom. Why not {qeylISvaD lIjlaHbe'bogh vay'}? These mean very different things. Assuming we are allowed to use -'e' for emphasis in a relative clause, which I am not convinced we are, we have qeylIS'e' lIjlaHbe'bogh vay'vaD gha'tlhIq vIbom I sing an ode of respect to someone who has not forgotten KAHLESS (as opposed to someone who has not forgotten someone else). qeylISvaD lIjlaHbe'bogh vay' gha'tlhIq vIbom I sing an ode of respect to Kahless the Unforgettable. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name