[122] in tlhIngan-Hol
Relative Clauses
dcctdw@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (dcctdw@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Sun Feb 16 15:24:16 1992
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
From: krankor@IMA.ISC.COM (Captain Krankor)
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 92 19:21:06 -0500
I sent out a long posting some time ago, documenting my discussion with Okrand
of the very issue raised by Eddie Maise recently about relative clauses contain
ing
both subject and object, and his acceptance of my proposed solution, which is
the first solution which Eddie speculated upon. I have asked Eli to try to
locate a copy of that posting, since I can't find it in my own stuff; I'd been
intending to re-post it anyway. In any case, since Okrand agreed with me, we
shall take that approach as gospel. Hence:
yaS qIpta'bogh HoD'e' == the captain who hit the officer.
yaS'e' qIpta'bogh HoD == the officer whom the captain hit.
Captain Krankor, Grammarian
