[85765] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: Once more into the ship in which I fled
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Terrence Donnelly)
Sat Jun 20 17:12:30 2009
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 14:10:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: Terrence Donnelly <terrence.donnelly@sbcglobal.net>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
--- On Sat, 6/20/09, David Trimboli <david@trimboli.name> wrote:
> Terrence Donnelly wrote:
> > Not to be a contrarian or anything, but what about the
> proverb
> > {meQtaHbogh qachDaq Suv qoH neH}? I know MO originally
> said he
> > couldn't make relative clauses work as anything but
> subjects or
> > objects, except here he did.
>
> He couldn't make the head noun of a relative clause be
> anything other
> than the subject or object *of the relative clause*, not of
> the main
> sentence.
>
Now this I can agree wholeheartedly with. But is it then possible that the head noun can be either the subject, object, or _any Type-5 suffixed noun_ to the main verb?
Which wouldn't have any answers for the "ship in which I fled", since the head noun is not the subject or object of the relative verb.
-- ter'eS
