Den 7. jan. 2007 kl. 17.14 skrev JR:
> Eloshtan also has subordinate clauses after the verb, but I consider a
> quotation to be an NP. I mean, a quotation doesn't have to have a  
> verb at
> all. How would you translate into Gaajan, "She said 'apples and  
> oranges.'"?
> Well at least those are nouns, and maybe you'd leave treat them as  
> direct
> objects. But what if the quotation had several parts, like "She  
> said 'No!
> Well ... maybe.... No! Apples and oranges! That's what I was  
> supposed to
> buy.'"? Or what if you wanted to quote something ungrammatical that  
> someone
> said, or something in a foreign language?

Well, the first one I would actually translate: "'Kalakuwe oranjus'  
ini a." And when it's longer, like in your second example, I would  
split it up. Which is pretty customary in English as well, as you  
indicated yourself: "'No!' she said, "Well ...etc."

Another natural thing to do, at least if you quote longer speeches,  
is to put it the Nietzschean way that Henrik proposed. That is: a  
separate sentence. In Gaajan the transitive auxiliary implies a  
pronoun if the sentence doesn't contain a direct object, so if you  
separate the quote out by a colon and quotation marks, the 'ini a'  
alone will mean 'she said it' instead of just 'she said'. Thus: "Ini  
a: 'apples and oranges.'" But you can also use 'pad' (this) for  
emphasis: "Pad ini a: 'apples and oranges.'"

Now, the colon and quotation marks of course aren't heard when you  
speak. And Gaajan actually isn't a written language. But complete  
sentences such as the "Ini a:" or "Pad ini a:" above will be  
pronounced with more finality (lower final tone on the auxiliary and  
a longer pause after it) than just an initial clause.  I'm sure your  
conpeople must have something similar.