Re: Relative clauses in Ikanirae Seru

> Yeah, like English does.  Ikanirae Seru wouldn't do that,
> because it avoids leaving subjects or objects out: it keeps
> subjects even in imperatives.  (The one case I can think of
> where a subject would be left out is in a passive-like
> sentence, which leaves the subject out, and leaves the object
> in its normal position after the verb.  Thus, "meat was
> eaten" would be closest translated as ha tame ketu a. PAST
> eat meat STATEMENT.)
Hindi makes a different subordinate clause distinction, marking clausal
complements of verbs with /ki/ and descriptive relatives with /dZo/:

/@nu ne  dZa:nti:     ki  sUm@n tShot`i Ti/
 Anu ABS know-FEM-PST REL Suman small  be-FEM-PST
 Anu knew that Suman was small.

(My clause order may be off above.)

/sUm@n jo  tSot`i Ti  sInD  ko dZayi/
 Suman REL small  was Sindh to go-PST-FEM
 Suman who was small went to Sindh.

---
Shreyas