[98941] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] 'arDaq
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (SuStel)
Fri Jun 20 10:28:57 2014
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 10:28:40 -0400
From: SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
In-Reply-To: <8D15AA8630021FB-2C98-1E90F@webmail-m242.sysops.aol.com>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
On 6/20/2014 10:09 AM, Brad Wilson wrote:
> Regarding
>
>> telDaq wovmoHwI'mey
>
>> Wing Lights
>
>> A direct translation of the English would have been {tel wovwI'mey}
>> "wing lights." The {-Daq} is not only?apparently?ungrammatical,
>> it's also completely unnecessary.
>
> What would be the distinction between lights that are an integral
> part of the wings (say, for navigation) and lights which are used to
> illuminate the wings (say, for identification or maintenance)? I
> don't think that distinction explains this example, but I was just
> curious.
There is no specific grammatical distinction that can be made. You can
make these distinctions with subordinate clauses:
chIjmeH tel wovwI'mey
wing lights for navigating
ngu'meH tel wovwI'mey
wing lights for identifying
leHmeH tel wovwI'mey
wing lights for maintaining
If you wanted to specify the lights' positions, you could say something
like:
tel bIng wovwI'mey
wing underside lights
tel bIng wovbogh wovwI'mey
lights that illuminate wings' undersides
--
SuStel
http://www.trimboli.name/
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
