[86323] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: Similies - ; rur
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Trimboli)
Mon Jul 27 22:31:50 2009
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 22:28:07 -0400
From: David Trimboli <david@trimboli.name>
In-reply-to: <746420.13172.qm@web82608.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Terrence Donnelly wrote:
> --- On Mon, 7/27/09, qe'San (Jon Brown) <qeSan@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> So I could say - [pe'moH; nItlhDu' rur] for "cut; like fingers" as
>> it's just a verb in the quality position but the moment I add a
>> noun depending on it's position I either create a sentence or make
>> the verb act adjectively on the noun. Both being incorrect useage??
>
> Not exactly. The problem with your original phrase was that {-bogh}
> verbs can't be the main verb in a sentence. {'oQqar pe'lu'bogh} lacks
> a main verb, so it is not a sentence, only a noun phrase, noun +
> relative verb.
>
> But although {pe'moH} is a main verb, it is not the one you want.
> {pe'} means "to cut something", and {pe'moH} is the causative form of
> that: someone causes someone to cut something. What you want is
> {pe'lu'}. Omitting the {-bogh} makes it a main verb: {'oQqar pe'lu';
> nItlhDu' rur}.
That's not right either. If we're to stick strictly to the form Okrand
uses for similes, it's
<sentence with verb of quality>; <noun phrase> rur
not
<any sentence>; <noun phrase> rur
In other words, the purpose of the simile is to compare the *quality* of
something with a noun phrase that inherently has that quality.
The first [sentence] attributes a quality to someone or something;
the second makes use of the verb {rur} ("resemble") to link the
quality to something that presumably epitomizes the quality.
(KGT, p. 27)
{pe'} is not a verb that expresses a quality; it expresses an action. So
unless you want to describe the *quality* of the tubers, a simile is not
the right tool.
--
SuStel
tlhIngan Hol MUSH
http://trimboli.name/mush
