[98911] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] 'arDaq
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (lojmitti7wi7nuv@gmail.com)
Wed Jun 18 09:51:05 2014
From: lojmitti7wi7nuv@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <CA+7zAmMd6UzfWhsAN_v9nvFhtdK+LnqaWafZRsuZnmZjE+-r7g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 09:50:44 -0400
To: "tlhingan-hol@kli.org" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
It may be clear to you that {quSDaq 'ar nav vIlannIS?} is correct and {quS =
'arDaq nav vIlannIS?} is incorrect, but it's less clear to the rest of us t=
hat you are necessarily right. The issue is that Type 5 noun suffixes migra=
te from the noun to which they'd normally apply in two known instances:
1. In a noun phrase consisting of a noun followed by an adjective describin=
g the noun, the adjective gets the noun's Type 5 suffix. {quS tInDaq nav yI=
lan.}
2. In a noun-noun construction the first noun can't have a Type 5 noun suff=
ix. It goes to the second noun. This is an odd rule since it's non-trivial =
trying to come up with an example where you'd be tempted to put the Type 5 =
on the first noun. Maybe I've just been following this rule so long that I =
can't think of a reason to want to break it...
Anyway, until we saw rule #1, we'd be just as sure as you are that {-Daq} g=
oes on the noun, because it's a noun suffix and {'ar} isn't a noun. But adj=
ectives aren't nouns, either, and {quS 'ar} may very well be the kind of no=
un phrase that gets the Type 5 migrated to the end of the phrase instead of=
following the noun within the phrase.
We simply don't know. The topic has not been raised until now.
On Jun 18, 2014, at 5:37 AM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
> Qov:
>>> I imagine that at some point I have said something like one of the
>>> following in conversation, completely unaware that I was doing anything=
odd.
>>> =
>>> ?quS 'arDaq nav vIlannIS? - How many chairs do I need to place paper on?
>>> ?HoH 'armo' bortaS wISuq?- How many killings will we get vengeance for?
>>> ?nuv 'arvaD Soj wIje'nIS? - How many people do we need to buy food for?
> =
> Voragh:
>> Based on no canon whatsoever, I would place the suffix on the noun:
>> =
>> ?quSDaq 'ar nav vIlannIS?
>> ?HoHmo' 'ar bortaS wISuq?
>> =
>> [Don't forget the verb {noD} "retaliate, seek revenge": ?HoHmo' 'ar man=
oD?]
>> =
>> ?nuvvaD 'ar Soj wIje'nIS?
>> =
>> I don't have time to do more searching, but have we seen any of the othe=
r question words used with these suffixes?
> =
> In TKD 6.4, only {nuq} and {'Iv} are said to occupy the place that
> would have been taken by the answer in the sentence. It is said of
> {'ar} that it follows the noun to which it refers (which can't be
> plural). There's no hint that it behaves anything like {nuq} or {'Iv}.
> Not all the question words are nouns.
> =
> Since {quS} is the noun in {quS 'ar} "how many chairs", to me it's
> fairly clear that "at/on how many chairs" is {quSDaq 'ar} and not
> *{quS 'arDaq}.
> =
> Qov:
>>> These two feel weirder, especially the last. I would omit the =96=91e=
=92
>>> ?tera=92Daq be=92 =91IH =91ar tu=92lu=92? =96 How many beautiful women =
are there on Earth?
>>> ?muj mu=92tlhegh =91ar=92e=92 qonbogh Qov?
> =
> No problem accepting {tera'Daq be' 'IH 'ar tu'lu'}, though I'd also
> accept {tera'Daq be' 'ar 'IH tu'lu'}. The latter follows the letter of
> TKD more closely, since it says that adjectival verbs immediately
> follow the noun, whereas of {'ar} it merely says it follows the noun.
> =
> I'd have put the suffix {-'e'} on the noun {mu'tlhegh} rather than on
> the question word {'ar} following the noun, as in {muj mu'tlhegh'e'
> 'ar qonbogh Qov}.
> =
> -- =
> De'vID
> =
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
