[88637] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: mu'tlheghvam yIlughmoH
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ruben Molina)
Fri Jan 7 19:39:57 2011
In-Reply-To: <F52986192E9FE346B0B7EF3D6F98E87710A6E1F6@EXDB3.ug.kth.se>
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 19:33:04 -0500
From: Ruben Molina <rmolina@gmail.com>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Felix Malmenbeck <felixm@kth.se> wrote:
> I feel that in order to be properly direct, one should incorporate a question or command, rather than just making a statement. My personal favorite remains {nuq 'oH bomvam 'o'megh'e'.}, as it gets the point across. Adding "I don't know it yet." would normally be redundant; if you knew it, you probably wouldn't ask.
qaQochbe'.
> However, it appears that the original intent was also to clarify that the speaker doesn't recognize it **yet**, as opposed to, say, that he's never heard it. For clarifications like these, I feel that using multiple sentences makes a lot of sense.
bIlugh.
{nuq 'oH bomvam 'o'megh'e'}, wej 'e' vISov 'ach 'e' vISovlI'.
chaq 'e' DaSov je, vaj 'e' chojanglaHchugh yIruch.
>> 'ach DuHmey chu' ghojlaHmeH vIgheltaH.
> An important thing to remember about purpose clauses is that you need to use the right verb prefix for the purpose action.
bIlugh.
> ghojlaHmeH 'Iv DagheltaH?
wIghojlaHmeH vIgheltaH.
Felix qatlho'
ruben
