[2514] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: naDev jIchu'
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Wed Jan 12 09:12:42 1994
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@klingon.East.Sun.COM>
From: Al Goodnis <al@concord.com>
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@klingon.East.Sun.COM>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 94 09:05:05 EST
> From: Will Martin <whm2m@uva.pcmail.virginia.edu>
> Subject: Re: naDev jIchu'
> Content-Length: 717
> ghomvam Damuv 'e' vIparHa'.
> nIDtaHghachlIj wa'DIch QaQqu', 'ach mu'tlheghlIj Qav vIyajbe'.
bIQaH vIDo'. pabwIj vumnIsba'. chaq jIjatlhbe'! :)
> If the {'e'} is supposed to refer to the previous sentence (a bit of a
> stretch, but okay in the right setting), having an adverb between the earlier
> sentence and {'e'} screws up the effect. Whether the wise ones believe the
> construction is legal or not, my opinion is that it is not easily understood,
> unlike everything else you said, which was perfect.
Thank you for the correction, but I am a little confused. If I had
been talking to you and our sentences alternated, as in a normal conversation,
and I wanted to refer to your last sentences content and belittle it for some
reason, I could not use the adverb and {'e'}?? How would you do it then?
-qor
