[87146] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: The topic marker -'e'
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Doty)
Wed Nov 25 15:51:45 2009
In-Reply-To: <4B0D9585.8000708@trimboli.name>
From: Christopher Doty <suomichris@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 12:48:12 -0800
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Huh... It's not a N-N construction, though; the <yIHHomvaD> and the
<may'> aren't in a N-N phrase?
Do we have any cannon about -vaD?? (Gods, I feel like I'm that dude
who is always looking words up when you're just trying to play
Scrabble...)
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:37, David Trimboli <david@trimboli.name> wrote:
> Steven Lytle wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Christopher Doty <suomichris@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> yIHHomvaD may' 'oH may' quvHa''e'
>>>
>> qatlh "yIHHomvaD" Dajatlh? yIHHom may' 'oH may' quvHa''e'.
>
> lugh lay'tel SIvten. When you've got a noun–noun construction (i.e.,
> genitive), the first noun cannot take a Type 5 suffix (TKD 3.4).
> *{yIHHomvaD may'} "battle for minor tribbles (tribblets?)" is incorrect;
> it should be {yIHHom may'} "minor tribble battle." Otherwise, your
> original sentence can only mean "For minor tribbles, a dishonorable
> battle is a battle."
>
> 'ach nuq 'oH yIHHom'e'?
>
> --
> SuStel
> tlhIngan Hol MUSH
> http://trimboli.name/mush
>
>
>
>
>
