[Tlhingan-hol] Question words used not in questions

[mayql qunenoS]

ok, thanks.

cpt qunnoQ

On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 10:44 AM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com> wrote:
> qunnoQ:
>>> He didn't tell me how he painted the cat.
>>> She didn't tell me why she tickled my dog.
>>>
>>> Can we use the words {chay'}, {qatlh} (or any other question word) in
>>> klingon in a similar manner ?
>
> 'arHa:
>> [...]
>> I would try to translate your first sentence this way, relying on {-meH}. (I
>> may be wrong in putting -vaD on vIghro'; I'm not quite sure how DIj works in
>> terms of being transitive.):
>>
>> vIghro'vaD DIjmeH nabDaj QIjbe'.
>> "He did not explain his plan for the purpose of him painting the cat."
>>
>> And maybe--
>> SoHvaD targhwI' qotlhmeH meqDaj ja'be'.
>> To me she did not report her reason for tickling my targ.
>
> {-meH} is supposed to describe purpose, although it seems to have a
> somewhat broader meaning in canon. So {DIjmeH nab} and {qotlhmeH meq}
> don't just mean "plan for painting" and "reason for tickling", they
> mean very specifically "plan whose purpose is painting" and "reason
> for the purpose of tickling". Is the purpose of the plan to paint? Is
> the purpose of the reason to tickle? I think the former is okay, but
> the latter seems off to me, though I understand them both.
>
> 'arHa:
>> These seem really clunky, but it's what I can come up with. {-meH} seems to
>> cover a lot of the territory that we are covering when we use how, why, when
>> in the way you've described.
>>
>> What does everyone else think? Got any better, less clunky ideas?
>
> vIghro' nguvmoHpu' ghaH. jIHvaD mIw ja'pu'be'.
> targhwIj qotlhta' ghaH. ngoQ QIjpu'be'.
>
> --
> De'vID
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol at kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol