[96087] in tlhIngan-Hol
[Tlhingan-hol] A few questions about grammar re: adverbials,
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (nIqolay qarpatya')
Tue Apr 23 16:53:45 2013
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 16:53:18 -0400
From: "nIqolay qarpatya'" <niqolay0@gmail.com>
To: tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
--===============1856235173423712881==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf307d0590ff9cc104db0d5faf
--20cf307d0590ff9cc104db0d5faf
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Hello! I've got a few questions about some minor points of Klingon grammar.
I've been messing around with Klingon for years, and I try to follow the
KLI mailing list and the updated lists of new words and canon, but there's
still some things I have questions about.
1) Is there any canon, one way or the other, on the acceptability of using
multiple adverbials in one sentence? DaH tagha' qayaj! ("Now I finally
understand you!"), pay' bong Heghpu' ("His death was a sudden accident.")
It seems like it should be acceptable, or at least understandable, but I
suppose that could probably be said about a number of utterances now known
to be non-grammatical.
2) Likewise, can epithets, number words, and quantity words be suffixed
like regular nouns? To what extent would sentences like the following be
permissible:
DujwIj tI'Ha' taHqeq'a'pu'vetlh! ("Those colossal jackasses botched the
repairs on my ship!")
pIj Seng cha'vam ("These two are trouble.")
"Neo", wa''a' SoH ("Neo, you are the One.")
latlhpu' tIvoqQo'. ("Don't trust the others.")
Hochqoq nuja'pu' ("He told us 'everything'." i.e. "He claims he told us
everything but I don't believe him.")
--20cf307d0590ff9cc104db0d5faf
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div>Hello! I've got a few questions about some m=
inor points of Klingon grammar. I've been messing around with Klingon f=
or years, and I try to follow the KLI mailing list and the updated lists of=
new words and canon, but there's still some things I have questions ab=
out.<br>
</div>1) Is there any canon, one way or the other, on the acceptability of =
using multiple adverbials in one sentence? DaH tagha' qayaj! ("Now=
I finally understand you!"), pay' bong Heghpu' ("His dea=
th was a sudden accident.") It seems like it should be acceptable, or =
at least understandable, but I suppose that could probably be said about a =
number of utterances now known to be non-grammatical.<br>
<br></div><div>2) Likewise, can epithets, number words, and quantity words =
be suffixed like regular nouns? To what extent would sentences like the fol=
lowing be permissible:<br></div><div>DujwIj tI'Ha' taHqeq'a'=
;pu'vetlh! ("Those colossal jackasses botched the repairs on my sh=
ip!")<br>
</div><div>pIj Seng cha'vam ("These two are trouble.")<br></d=
iv><div>"Neo", wa''a' SoH ("Neo, you are the One=
.")<br></div><div>latlhpu' tIvoqQo'. ("Don't trust th=
e others.")<br>
</div><div>Hochqoq nuja'pu' ("He told us 'everything'.=
" i.e. "He claims he told us everything but I don't believe h=
im.")</div></div>
--20cf307d0590ff9cc104db0d5faf--
--===============1856235173423712881==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
--===============1856235173423712881==--
