tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Jan 26 18:08:44 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: I Object!
jatlh DloraH:
> leng works like jaH and ghoS. The destination is the direct object. The
> indirect object with -Daq on it is the medium by/in/on which you travel.
> HolQeD Dec 98, Okrand:
>
> yuQ vIleng - I travel to the planet
> yuQDaq vIleng - I travel to the planet
> (the second one has -Daq, but notice the prefix vI- )
This point had been made to me before, with {jaH}, and I didn't quite get it
then. I was still scratching my head until I read SuStel's post. Now I
believe I understand.
jatlh SuStel:
>Klingon has objects. It also has subjects and headers. These are the only
>"noun cases."
> yuQDaq vIleng
> "I travel to the planet."
> yuQDaq = object (that happens to have a locative sense)
> DujDaq yuQ vIleng
> "I travel to the planet on the ship."
> DujDaq = header (that happens to have a locative sense)
> yuQ = object
This is where the light bulb went on for me. It is now my understanding that
the direct object of {leng}, {ghoS}, or {jaH} can have the suffix -Daq, or
not, and it doesn't change the meaning. Having -Daq does not necessarily
make a noun an "indirect object". A header in a sentence with these verbs
may have the same form that a direct object may have (i.e. -Daq), and can
only be distinguished with certainty from a direct object by seeing if the
verb has a prefix indicating an object or not.
DujDaq jIleng - I wander around on board the ship.
Duj vIleng - I travel to the ship.
DujDaq vIleng - I travel to the ship.
I suppose it would also be possible to have a sentence where the header and
the object are both marked with -Daq.
yuQDaq DujDaq jIleng - I wander around on board the ship, (which is) on the
planet.
yuQDaq DujDaq vIleng - I travel to the ship, (which is) on the planet.
Do I have it right?
jatlh Lawrence:
> I believe I understand the *intent* here, but the distinction that is being
> made could just as easily be dismissed as disingenous.
> Does any language actually "have" grammatical features?
In theory, I agree with the point being made here. But in this case,
remember that SuStel's different way of putting it finally made it clear to
me, the learner. Of course, the grammar of any language can be described in
multiple ways -- and I think it's helpful to make several ways of looking at
it available to the student. Keeping in mind, naturally, that any one way is
just that: _one_ way.
-Sengval