[90596] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] nuq bop bom: 'ay' SochmaH loS:
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Agnieszka Solska)
Tue Nov 8 17:48:00 2011
From: Agnieszka Solska <agnpau1@hotmail.com>
To: tlhIngan Hol mailing list <tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org>,
tlhIngan Hol <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 22:47:35 +0000
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1926.1320772623.12901.tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
>> volchaHDu'chaj 'uchtaHvIS meH ghoS 'ungya.
>
>Forgive my introspection here, but I thought this was interesting.
>When I encountered this sentence, I was slightly thrown by the {-chaj}
>with no antecedent at the beginning of a paragraph, and I slowed down
>to read it carefully. I got more confused as I went along until I
>reached the very last word, figured out what everything was supposed
>to be, and read it again with full knowledge of what all the subjects
>and objects were.
>
>I can't start over and read it for the first time, but I did review
>the whole thing again just now without being interrupted between
>paragraphs, and the {-chaj} reference was obvious. Interestingly,
>reading the full sentence "at speed" doesn't give me the same vague
>sense of frustration I get when reading it a word at a time. Even now,
>knowing exactly what it says, if I read it slowly I feel like I'm
>being made to wait longer than I should for the necessary information.
>To accommodate less rapid readers, I would suggest putting {'ungya}
>before the {meH ghoS} clause.
Is {-chaj} really necessary here? Can't we simply say:
{volchaHDu' 'uchtaHvIS meH ghoS 'ungya}? Isn't it
obvious whose {volchaHDu'} 'ungya is holding?
'ISqu'
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
