De'vID:

What is the object of {'oH}?

I think it is the sentence which precedes it. I think it is the {chabHommeylIj Sopta' vIghro'wIj}. Antony Appleyard:

{chabHommeylIj Sopta' vIghro'wIj 'e' 'oH vIt'e'}

Is {chabHommeylIj Sopta' vIghro'wIj 'e' 'oH vIt'e'} correct ? qunnoq

SuStel:

Why are you twisting in knots trying to use a sentence as object with a pronoun?

I'm not trying to use a sentence as object with a pronoun. I'm trying however to understand what is right and what is wrong. The initial sentence of the thread, the {chabHommeylIj Sopta' vIghro'wIj 'oH vIt'e'}, was written by me, and I posted here because I was wondering (and still am), with regards to whether it is a valid/correct sentence. The second sentence, the {chabHommeylIj Sopta' vIghro'wIj 'e' 'oH vIt'e'}, was written by Antony Appleyard and I asked because I was wondering (and still am), whether it is correct. I'm not trying to create new rules, or extract new rules from the existing ones, but if I don't ask then I will never learn. qunnoq On Aug 22, 2017 3:54 PM, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote: Why are you twisting in knots trying to use a sentence as object with a pronoun? chabHommeylIj Sopbejta' vIghro'wIj -- SuStel http://trimboli.name *From: *mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> *Sent: *Tuesday, August 22, 2017 8:00 AM *To: *tlhingan-hol@kli.org *Subject: *Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Sentence as object using {'oH} De'vID:

What is the object of {'oH}?

I think it is the sentence which precedes it. I think it is the {chabHommeylIj Sopta' vIghro'wIj}. Antony Appleyard:

{chabHommeylIj Sopta' vIghro'wIj 'e' 'oH vIt'e'}

Is {chabHommeylIj Sopta' vIghro'wIj 'e' 'oH vIt'e'} correct ? qunnoq _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org

SuStel:

Your original subject line is “Sentence as object using *‘oH*.”

Yes it is, but that's because the original sentence of the thread seemed to me as "a sentence as object using {'oH}"; not because I was trying to bend the rules, so as to create a sao with an {'oH}, instead of {'e'}. Anyway, thanks for answering and clarifying this matter. SuStel, reH choQaHmo' qatlho', 'ej tlho'wIj Daghaj. qunnoq On Aug 22, 2017 5:23 PM, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:

Your original subject line is “Sentence as object using *‘oH*.”

Your original sentence, without *‘e’,* is not correct. In the *A pro B’e’ *construction, A and B are nouns or noun phrases, not sentences.

The proposed version with *‘e’ *might be technically correct, but I have a hard time believing Klingons use verb-acting pronouns in sentence-as-object constructions. The final verb in an SAO should generally be something simple and unexceptional.

-- SuStel http://trimboli.name

*From: *mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> *Sent: *Tuesday, August 22, 2017 9:27 AM *To: *tlhingan-hol@kli.org *Subject: *Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Sentence as object using {'oH}

SuStel:

...

Why are you twisting in knots trying to use a sentence as

...

object with a pronoun?

I'm not trying to use a sentence as object with a pronoun. I'm trying however to understand what is right and what is wrong.

The initial sentence of the thread, the {chabHommeylIj Sopta' vIghro'wIj 'oH vIt'e'}, was written by me, and I posted here because I was wondering (and still am), with regards to whether it is a valid/correct sentence.

The second sentence, the {chabHommeylIj Sopta' vIghro'wIj 'e' 'oH vIt'e'}, was written by Antony Appleyard and I asked because I was wondering (and still am), whether it is correct.

I'm not trying to create new rules, or extract new rules from the existing ones, but if I don't ask then I will never learn.

qunnoq

On Aug 22, 2017 3:54 PM, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:

Why are you twisting in knots trying to use a sentence as object with a pronoun?

chabHommeylIj Sopbejta' vIghro'wIj

-- SuStel http://trimboli.name

*From: *mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> *Sent: *Tuesday, August 22, 2017 8:00 AM *To: *tlhingan-hol@kli.org *Subject: *Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Sentence as object using {'oH}

De'vID:

...

What is the object of {'oH}?

I think it is the sentence which precedes it. I think it is the {chabHommeylIj Sopta' vIghro'wIj}.

Antony Appleyard:

...

{chabHommeylIj Sopta' vIghro'wIj 'e' 'oH vIt'e'}

Is {chabHommeylIj Sopta' vIghro'wIj 'e' 'oH vIt'e'} correct ?

qunnoq

_______________________________________________ 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 Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 8:00 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:

Is {chabHommeylIj Sopta' vIghro'wIj 'e' 'oH vIt'e'} correct ?

Okrand has never used or commented on using {'e'} with a copula pronoun (i.e. a pronoun used verbally to mean "to be"), so we don't know if {'e' 'oH} constructions are acceptable or not. If they are, though, your sentence is probably grammatically acceptable, though a little redundant. There is the question of whether {vIghro'mey} and other animals are actually capable of intention and can therefore use the {-ta'} suffix, though that's more of a philosophical question than a syntactic one. (Although, since {'e'} is a pronoun, maybe it can be used as a copula too... perhaps {chabHommeylIj Sopta' vIghro'wIj 'e' vIt'e'}? Actually, no, that's too crazy even for me.) On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 10:23 AM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:

The proposed version with *‘e’ *might be technically correct, but I have a hard time believing Klingons use verb-acting pronouns in sentence-as-object constructions. The final verb in an SAO should generally be something simple and unexceptional.

This sounds more like a subjective stylistic choice rather than a grammatical rule. I agree that in most cases there's probably shorter or clearer ways to phrase a given sentence than {'e' 'oH}, but I wouldn't rule it out entirely just because most Klingons wouldn't phrase it like that.

On 8/24/2017 6:38 AM, Lieven wrote:

One other thing that came to my mind: if you add "that" to the english phrase (it is true /that/...) I began to think about using the verb {teH} to say "it is true that..." like {Sopta' 'e' teH}. But that does not work; we know that {'e'} is used with verbs of thinking or observation like "see", "know" etc. I'm sure {teH} is not one of that kind, so that does not work. (although it would nice to have)

More importantly, *'e'* has to be the object of a verb, and *teH* does not take an object without a *-moH* attached to it. The advice in /The Klingon Dictionary/ that sentences-as-object primarily use verbs of thinking and observation as their second verbs must be taken with a grain of salt. We have tons of examples of sentences-as-object that don't follow that advice. For example, I count nine uses of sentence-as-object in /The Klingon Way/ (not counting multiple instances in the same saying), and of these only two could be said to be remotely about thinking (*tul* and *Hech*) and one about observation (*Qoy*). Maybe you could argue that *wIv* represents thinking about a choice, and maybe you could argue that *tIv* is about thinking of enjoyment, but we're opening up the meaning of "thinking or observation" pretty widely, and we still have the verbs *chaw', mev,* and *baj* to consider. I don't think Okrand has had that particular bit of advice in mind when crafting sentence-as-object constructions subsequent to /TKD/. I think it's more important simply to keep the second-sentence concept relatively simple. Don't try fancy tricks with these sentences. If you get to a point where you're not sure if you /can/ do something, you probably shouldn't. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name

On 8/24/2017 10:34 AM, Lieven wrote:

Am 24.08.2017 um 15:29 schrieb SuStel:

...

More importantly, *'e'* has to be the object of a verb, and *teH* does not take an object without a *-moH* attached to it.

quSDaq bIba'. Thanks for making this addition. That's the obvious thing I had in mind, but did not write down.

Careful! I don't think you intended this, but *quSDaq ba'* has the connotation of disparaging the listener. It's the Klingon equivalent of rolling your eyes and saying, "Well, duh!" -- SuStel http://trimboli.name