[101392] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Captain Qov versus Qov's captain
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (=?UTF-8?B?QW5kcsOpIE3DvGxsZXI=?=)
Thu Oct 15 13:04:40 2015
In-Reply-To: <804521A6-858E-41AA-A600-F0BCE36A3CE8@comcast.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 19:04:21 +0200
From: =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcsOpIE3DvGxsZXI=?= <esperantist@gmail.com>
To: "tlhingan-hol@kli.org" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
--===============2029953634024110596==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113436fe9ccdf9052227ab13
--001a113436fe9ccdf9052227ab13
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Yes to both, kechpaja,
It would have to be {Qov ghaHbogh HoD'e'} 'the captain who is Qov'.
Alternatively you could say: {Qov'e' ghaHbogh HoD} 'Qov, who is the
captain'. I think there are some canonical examples with the {-'e'}
missing. Maybe due to mistakes.
{Qov HoDDaj} as used by Anthony, is not just non-Okrandian, but also
missleading and not clear. It could only be interpreted as "his captain
Qov". The captain of someone or something, and the captain's name is Qov.
- Andr=C3=A9
2015-10-15 18:44 GMT+02:00 <kechpaja@comcast.net>:
>
> > {Qov 'oHbogh HoD} would mean "the captain, who is Qov"
>
> Sorry to nitpick, but shouldn't that be {Qov ghaHbogh HoD}, since the
> captain is presumably a being capable of using language?
>
> Also, tangentially: would you need {'e'} when one of the pronouns is used
> verbally in a relative clause like that? "The captain is Qov" would
> traditionally be {Qov ghaH HoD'e'}, if I'm not mistaken.
>
> - kechpaja -
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
>
--001a113436fe9ccdf9052227ab13
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div>Yes to both, kechpaja,<br></div>It would ha=
ve to be {Qov ghaHbogh HoD'e'} 'the captain who is Qov'. Al=
ternatively you could say: {Qov'e' ghaHbogh HoD} 'Qov, who is t=
he captain'. I think there are some canonical examples with the {-'=
e'} missing. Maybe due to mistakes.<br><br></div>{Qov HoDDaj} as used b=
y Anthony, is not just non-Okrandian, but also missleading and not clear. I=
t could only be interpreted as "his captain Qov". The captain of =
someone or something, and the captain's name is Qov. <br><br></div>- An=
dr=C3=A9<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"=
>2015-10-15 18:44 GMT+02:00 <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:kechpa=
ja@comcast.net" target=3D"_blank">kechpaja@comcast.net</a>></span>:<br><=
blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px=
#ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=3D""><br>
> {Qov 'oHbogh HoD} would mean "the captain, who is Qov"<b=
r>
<br>
</span>Sorry to nitpick, but shouldn't that be {Qov ghaHbogh HoD}, sinc=
e the captain is presumably a being capable of using language?<br>
<br>
Also, tangentially: would you need {'e'} when one of the pronouns i=
s used verbally in a relative clause like that? "The captain is Qov&qu=
ot; would traditionally be {Qov ghaH HoD'e'}, if I'm not mistak=
en.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0- kechpaja -<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Tlhingan-hol mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:Tlhingan-hol@kli.org">Tlhingan-hol@kli.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol" rel=3D"norefe=
rrer" target=3D"_blank">http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol</=
a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
--001a113436fe9ccdf9052227ab13--
--===============2029953634024110596==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
--===============2029953634024110596==--
