tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Aug 13 06:09:23 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Attending a school (was RE: Daq vIDabbogh vIchoH)
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Attending a school (was RE: Daq vIDabbogh vIchoH)
- Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 09:08:42 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
- Priority: NORMAL
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 01:29:41 EDT [email protected] wrote:
> In a message dated 8/12/99 3:37:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> [email protected] writes:
>
> << Look at how surprising {Dub} was. >>
>
> chay' mer?
Most people expected the subject of the gloss "improve" to be
the entity doing the improving so that {DubmoH} would be the
form of the verb used when A causes B to improve. Meanwhile,
Okrand has used {Dub} twice and both times the subject was the
agent of improvement and the entity improved was the direct
object. Apparently, were you to add {-moH}, the subject would be
causing a second entity to improve a third entity.
If you use the one grammatical example we have of this sort of
thing which I tend to accept and several others tend to reject,
the first entity would be the subject, the second entity would
be the indirect object (using {-vaD) and the third entity would
be the direct object.
Most of us were surprised that a bare {Dub} took a direct object.
> T'Lod
charghwI'