[Tlhingan-hol] Concerning the purpose clauses

[Robyn Stewart]

1. Because ja'chuq takes no object, and a -meH clause precedes the main clause. 

{ja'chuqmeH} = in order to confer
{rojHom neH jagh la'} = the enemy commander wants a truce (OVS)

If the -meH verb had a subject and object, its OVS would precede the main clause OVS. 

2. that would be "for the purpose of going on killing him". Of the process of killing him is the exercise rather than him being dead, then yeah, sure. But that's not normally what people want to say. 

3. A purpose clause is like an entire normal sentence, except with -meH on the verb.

DaHjaj yaHwIjDaq jIpaSbe'meH jabbI'IDvam vIghang. 


> On Nov 9, 2015, at 2:57, qunnoQ HoD <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> I was reading the purpose clauses and the following questions came up,making me feel like a bird of prey lost in a nebula..
> 
> 1. lets consider the following example :
> 
> ja'chuqmeH rojHom neH jagh la'  The enemy commander wishes a truce (in order) to confer.
> 
> why do we say {ja'chuqmeH rojHom neH jagh la'} instead of {rojHom ja'chuqmeH neH jagh la'} ?
> 
> 2. jagh luHoHmeH jagh lunejtaH They are searching for the enemy in order to kill him/her.
> 
> could we say {jagh luHoHtaHmeH jagh lunejtaH} meaning <<they are searching for the enemy,for the purpose of killing him>> ?
> 
> 3. the definition of a purpose clause is verb plus {-meH},or verb plus {-meH} plus noun,or noun plus verb plus {-meH} ?
> 
> HQ 7.3, p.6, Sept. 1998 (as i read in boQwI') would certainly come in handy right now.. Just to think that there is a HolQeD article explaining all this -an article I cannot have- makes feel like a dog whose food is placed just where its leash ends !
> 
> cpt qunnoQ
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol at kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol