[111594] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Placement of the adverb
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Lieven)
Fri Oct 13 13:06:18 2017
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
From: Lieven <levinius@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 15:38:23 +0200
In-Reply-To: <4bc42d60-eff6-373f-228a-c0b4645f20ef@trimboli.name>
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
On 10/11/2017 7:11 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
>> Is there a difference between these two sentences ?
Am 11.10.2017 um 15:03 schrieb SuStel:
> Do Klingons do this? Probably. Everyday Klingon speech is probably a lot
> less formal than we teach on this list. I don't think we've seen this
> particular thing being done before, though.
I'v also been thinking about this lately, and like to ask the question
differently:
TKD tells us that the adverbial comes at the beginning of a sentence.
The question is, how is a sentence defined, or wouldn't it be better to
define this as "the adverbial comes at the beginning of a
[linguistic-term-here] clause"?
paq'batlh has a phrase where the word {DaH} does not appear at the very
beginning, but it appears on a spot where it modifies the right verb:
{SuvwI' DameH puqloDwI' vIghojHa'moH DaH 'e' vItlhoj}
"I see now, I have failed to raise my son a man."
instead of going for
{DaH [SuvwI' DameH puqloDwI' vIghojHa'moH 'e' vItlhoj]. }
mayqel's question can apply to many adverbials:
ghorgh bIghungmo' bIHegh?
bIghungmo' ghorgh bIHegh?
bIpuvtaHvIS qatlh bIbom?
qatlh bIpuvtaHvIS bIbom?
Is there any canon for this, or at least some linguistic argument for this?
I dare not to say that it "feels" right. :-)
--
Lieven L. Litaer
aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany"
http://www.klingonisch.net
http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Adverbials
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
