tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Dec 16 14:55:48 1998

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: A few phrases.



>Patrick Masterson jang pagh:
>>> The truth is out there: voghDaq vIt tu'lu'
>>Do you even need <vogh> here? If you decide you do, I would be strongly
>>tempted to treat the <vogh> like <Dat>, <pa'>, and <naDev> and omit the
>><-Daq>. We don't have canon (that I know of) to support this, but I cannot
>>believe that <vogh> does not behave like <Dat>.

I can.  TKD is quite explicit.  "These words may perhaps be translated more
literally as 'area around here,' 'area over there,' and 'all places,'
respectively.  Unlike other nouns, these three words are never followed by
the locative suffix."

Furthermore, {vogh} is part of the original TKD, so one cannot argue that it
was a later addition to the language and might be an exception.  Only three
words do not use {-Daq} for the locative, and {vogh} is not one of these.

The only reason to go along with the idea of leaving off {-Daq} from {vogh}
is because it seems to work nicely with other established meanings.  In
language, that's not enough.  Sometimes languages are not logical.

SuStel
Stardate 98959.4





Back to archive top level