Interrogation words and type 5 noun suffixes
Hello all! Today I was wondering if you could combine interrogation words such as nuq and 'Iv with type 5 noun suffixes, in particular -vaD and -mo' The TKD says;
For {'Iv} <who?> and {nuq} <what?> the question word fits into the sentence in the position that would be occupied by the answer.
So, if the thing we want to ask is {what for; because of what; to whom; because of whom}, could we simply use {nuqvaD; nuqmo'; 'IvvaD; 'Ivmo'}? For example: nuqvaD lI' De'vam? = what is this information useful for? 'IvvaD taj nobpu' qama' ?= to whom did the prisoner give the knife? nuqmo' jachtaH ghaH? = because of what is he shouting? 'Ivmo' tIwtaH ghaH? = because of whom is he acting emotionally? I know some of the above could be rephrased easily in a "safer" grammatical way but I'm really interested in whether these alternative constructs would be grammatical and acceptable. Thanks in advance! ghItlhjaj
On Saturday, December 2, 2017, Aurélie Demonchaux < demonchaux.aurelie@gmail.com> wrote:
nuqvaD lI' De'vam? = what is this information useful for?
This sentence gave me a silly thought: noH! va! Qun QaQ, tlhIH! nuqvaD QaQ? paghna'! yIja'qa! Sorry, I couldn't resist. Now someone can give a serious answer. ~mIp'av
Aurelie, on August 7 2017, I had asked exactly the same. The title of that thread was "'Iv with type 5 noun suffixes". Unfortunately, because now I'm only able to use my phone, I can't find the link to that thread, so if someone could post it, in order to help Aurelie, it would be great. ~ nI'ghma On Dec 2, 2017 22:00, "Ed Bailey" <bellerophon.modeler@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, December 2, 2017, Aurélie Demonchaux < demonchaux.aurelie@gmail.com> wrote:
nuqvaD lI' De'vam? = what is this information useful for?
This sentence gave me a silly thought:
noH! va! Qun QaQ, tlhIH! nuqvaD QaQ?
paghna'!
yIja'qa!
Sorry, I couldn't resist. Now someone can give a serious answer.
~mIp'av _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 12:59 PM, Aurélie Demonchaux < demonchaux.aurelie@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello all!
Today I was wondering if you could combine interrogation words such as nuq and 'Iv with type 5 noun suffixes, in particular -vaD and -mo'
The TKD says;
For {'Iv} <who?> and {nuq} <what?> the question word fits into the sentence in the position that would be occupied by the answer.
So, if the thing we want to ask is {what for; because of what; to whom; because of whom}, could we simply use {nuqvaD; nuqmo'; 'IvvaD; 'Ivmo'}?
For example: nuqvaD lI' De'vam? = what is this information useful for? 'IvvaD taj nobpu' qama' ?= to whom did the prisoner give the knife? nuqmo' jachtaH ghaH? = because of what is he shouting? 'Ivmo' tIwtaH ghaH? = because of whom is he acting emotionally?
I know some of the above could be rephrased easily in a "safer" grammatical way but I'm really interested in whether these alternative constructs would be grammatical and acceptable.
Thanks in advance!
I don't believe there are examples of {'Iv} or {nuq} being used with {-vaD} and {-mo'}. {nuqDaq} already provides a precedent for type 5 suffixes on question pronouns, though, and there's no rule explicitly preventing using other type 5s on {'Iv} and {nuq}. {nuqvaD} and {'Ivmo'} and so on all make clear sense semantically. You're probably fine to use them. On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 4:10 PM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
Aurelie, on August 7 2017, I had asked exactly the same.
The title of that thread was "'Iv with type 5 noun suffixes".
Unfortunately, because now I'm only able to use my phone, I can't find the link to that thread, so if someone could post it, in order to help Aurelie, it would be great.
Here we go: http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/2017-August/004848.html (That's a link to voragh's reply with some relevant canon examples, with mayqel's original post quoted at the end.)
On 12/2/2017 5:18 PM, nIqolay Q wrote:
I don't believe there are examples of {'Iv} or {nuq} being used with {-vaD} and {-mo'}. {nuqDaq} already provides a precedent for type 5 suffixes on question pronouns, though, and there's no rule explicitly preventing using other type 5s on {'Iv} and {nuq}. {nuqvaD} and {'Ivmo'} and so on all make clear sense semantically. You're probably fine to use them.
But we do have a canon example of *nuq'e' *(*Sojvetlh 'oH nuq'e'* from /Power Klingon/), which further supports the idea that you can put noun suffixes on these words. (My guess is that only type 5 suffixes would be allowed.) -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
Thank you all for your replies - all duly noted! :) And yes, I don't think it would make sense in any case to have other types of suffixes on 'Iv and nuq than type 5. 2017-12-03 1:07 GMT+01:00 SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name>:
On 12/2/2017 5:18 PM, nIqolay Q wrote:
I don't believe there are examples of {'Iv} or {nuq} being used with {-vaD} and {-mo'}. {nuqDaq} already provides a precedent for type 5 suffixes on question pronouns, though, and there's no rule explicitly preventing using other type 5s on {'Iv} and {nuq}. {nuqvaD} and {'Ivmo'} and so on all make clear sense semantically. You're probably fine to use them.
But we do have a canon example of *nuq'e' *(*Sojvetlh 'oH nuq'e'* from *Power Klingon*), which further supports the idea that you can put noun suffixes on these words. (My guess is that only type 5 suffixes would be allowed.)
-- SuStelhttp://trimboli.name
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
nuv wa': [mumble mumble]-wIj vIchIl nuv cha': nuqlIj DachIl? On Sun, 2017-12-03 at 20:12 +0100, Aurélie Demonchaux wrote:
Thank you all for your replies - all duly noted! :)
And yes, I don't think it would make sense in any case to have other types of suffixes on 'Iv and nuq than type 5.
2017-12-03 1:07 GMT+01:00 SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name>:
On 12/2/2017 5:18 PM, nIqolay Q wrote:
I don't believe there are examples of {'Iv} or {nuq} being used with {-vaD} and {-mo'}. {nuqDaq} already provides a precedent for type 5 suffixes on question pronouns, though, and there's no rule explicitly preventing using other type 5s on {'Iv} and {nuq}. {nuqvaD} and {'Ivmo'} and so on all make clear sense semantically. You're probably fine to use them.
But we do have a canon example of *nuq'e' *(*Sojvetlh 'oH nuq'e'* from *Power Klingon*), which further supports the idea that you can put noun suffixes on these words. (My guess is that only type 5 suffixes would be allowed.)
-- SuStelhttp://trimboli.name
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 3:00 PM, DloraH <seruq@bellsouth.net> wrote:
nuv wa': [mumble mumble]-wIj vIchIl nuv cha': nuqlIj DachIl?
My first thought was to translate the "What are *thooose*?" meme in a single word: {nuqmeyvetlh'e'?} (This is almost certainly complete gibberish even by the laxer standards of "intentional ungrammaticality", but it tickled me.)
participants (6)
-
Aurélie Demonchaux -
DloraH -
Ed Bailey -
mayqel qunenoS -
nIqolay Q -
SuStel