tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Aug 31 10:28:15 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: }} jIjot 'ej jIQuch
- From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: }} jIjot 'ej jIQuch
- Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 10:28:15 -0400
>Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 09:29:22 -0400 (EDT)
>From: "Elizabeth C. Hoyt" <[email protected]>
>[tlheghmeQ floats peacefully into the room]
>'IH DaHjaj.
>*sing Ha'DIbaHmey.
>QaQ tI pIw.
>De'wI' jItu'.
Should be "De'wI' vItu'", right?
>qach retlhDaq 'oH DujwIj'e'.
>I'm not sure I got that last sentence right. I'm trying to say that my car
>is near the building (rather than where I usually have to park).
It's not bad. Perhaps something with "Sum" (it's a CK word meaning "be
near")? Trouble is the old transitivity problem. How would I say "my car
is near the building" using the verb "Sum"? Maybe "Sum" is intransitive,
and you have to do
Sum DujwIj qach je.
But the one example of it is in the sentence "Sum Daqmeyvam"/"These places
are nearby," and somehow it doesn't sound right that you'd elide part of
the subject if it were used as above (used as above, "Sum Daqmeyvam" would
mean "these places are near to each other.") It makes more sense to me
that "Sum" is transitive, and its object is the thing that the subject is
near to, giving us
qach Sum DujwIj.
That way, "Sum Daqmeyvam" would be a simple elision of the object,
replacing it with something unpspecified or just "in general", like "maSop"
for "we eat" without really dealing with *what* we eat. Presumably, it
would be understood that the object of "Sum" is "naDev" or some such: the
local area.
>I hit `send' accidentally. I also wanted to say that I couldn't find the
>word for `sing'. (?)
"bom". See HolQeD 2.4.
~mark