tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jun 20 19:44:27 2000
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Raise Your betleH to the Stars.....
- From: qe'San - Jon Brown <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Raise Your betleH to the Stars.....
- Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 19:44:15 -0700 (PDT)
Before someone brings it up re my previous message. Yes I know that in
TKD6.8 MO stated that, "the object of the verb is the recipient of the
action, the direct object may be considered the beneficiary." I also
know that I've gone and used the word "recipient" to try and
distinguish between the way some people were using beneificiary to mean
something that benifits. I shouldn't have used recipient in this
context but reiterated that an iderect object can be the benificiary of
s unbenificial action.
In thinking again about this I do want to say I believe that when
aiming/pointing at an object I feel -vaD seems more logical and in
reference to an action following a spacial direction that -Daq (as I
originally used) is more likely applied to lurgh. whether that should
apply to anything else, who know ?? (I know.... MO does)
"I aim at a planet" can mean either, "in the direction of the planet I
aim" or "On the planet I aim". However, "I aim for the planet" can mean
only one thing.
Just thought of another English example "get on the Train for work"
Why can we use FOR here? I know you can use TO also but I was just
trying to show a Possiblilty.
qe'San
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send instant messages with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com/