tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jul 29 09:20:39 2003
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: The years sometimes teach us what the days never know.
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: KLBC: The years sometimes teach us what the days never know.
- Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 10:16:58 -0400
In a message dated 7/29/2003 9:02:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:
>
>
> > {Dochmey'e' Sovbe'bogh jajmey rut nughojmoH DISmey}
> >
> > Unless you want to avoid the situation of a "transitive verb with -moH".
> > This can cause confusion,
> > and some people like to rephrase this, just like you suggested, with
> > {-vaD}:
> > {maHvaD Dochmey'e' Sovbe'bogh jajmey ghojmoH DISmey}
> >
> > I'm still not sure if this is the "perfect" solution. I'm a bit stick
> > with the idea of {ghoj} What's its
> > object? Let's see what the list says to this. :-)
>
> ghojmoH is really ghoj + -moH
>
> {maHvaD Dochmey'e' Sovbe'bogh jajmey ghojmoH DISmey}
> "The years cause the things (which days don't know) to learn for us."
>
>
> With the first option:
> {Dochmey'e' Sovbe'bogh jajmey rut nughojmoH DISmey}
> we might be able to get away with saying it is an -'e' in the "header"
> position, "As for things which..."
>
> One way to handle the objects of ghoj and ghojmoH is to use multiple sentences.
> "The years teach us (cause us to learn). We learn things which the days don't
> know."
> /nughojmoH DISmey. Dochmey'e' Sovbe'bogh jajmey DIghoj./
>
>
>
> And now someone will mention the canon:
> >>>
> qorDu'Daj tuq 'oS Ha'quj'e' tuQbogh wo'rIv. tuQtaHvIS Hem. ghaHvaD quHDaj
> qawmoH.
>
> The sash that Worf wears is a symbol of his family's house. He wears it proudly
> as a reminder of his heritage.
> <<<
>
> and possibly a fight will break out and blood will be
> spilled... again.
>
The only reason a fight might break out is because you state
your opinions about the object of {ghojmoH} as fact rather
than opinion. The honorable thing to do is simply say, "In
my opinion..."
What happens to transitive verbs and their objects when
{-moH} is added is indeed a hot topic, and by no means
as cut-and-dried as DloraH implies. I've spilled much
blood on this topic myself in the past, but I have come
to see that this argument is unwinnable by either side
and that only MO can resolve it. So until we get more
canon or a definite ruling, I'm not getting sucked into
any more fights. Either pick a position and use it (but
recognize that it is only your opinion), or avoid the
construction altogether.
>
>
> DloraH
-- ter'eS