[86269] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: Questions with law'/puS
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (ghunchu'wI')
Wed Jul 15 08:08:49 2009
In-Reply-To: <A02401B9-BB5D-448B-9F23-3EFDEF5FBF5E@embarqmail.com>
From: "ghunchu'wI'" <qunchuy@alcaco.net>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 08:04:13 -0400
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
On Jul 14, 2009, at 11:01 PM, Doq wrote:
> You are ignoring that {-be'} is a suffix that can be used on verbs
> used as adjectives, as in {cha' yIH lI'be'}.
I don't think he's ignoring it. It's just irrelevant to the point
he's making. I think he's reading Okrand's half-literal translation
of the {A Q law'be' B Q puSbe'} as evidence that the {law'} and {puS}
can be treated like any other verb in a regular Klingon sentence.
I accept that as a valid argument, but I do not find it a convincing
one. Even in this case, the utterance is called a "construction",
not a "sentence". Its grammar is exceptional. We cannot confidently
apply to it anything we know about verb suffixes in general.
-- ghunchu'wI'
