tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Feb 17 11:16:15 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: use of DoH

Steven Boozer ([email protected]) [KLI Member] 

david fourman:
>>   In TKD DoH is defined as "to back off from".
>>So does this mean when used with a noun you do not use -vo'
>>because the idea "from" would be implied in the verb itself.
>>ex. Dujvo' yIDoH. or Duj yIDoH.

De'vID:
>I would guess, from the way that it's defined, that <-vo'> is unnecessary.

Correct.  We have one example of {DoH} "back away from, back off, get away 
from" in canon:

   wo' choqmeH may' DoHlu'chugh lujbe'lu'
   "ending a battle to save an empire is no defeat"  TKW

{may' Dohlu'chugh} "if one backs away from a battle" - without {-vo'}.

>There's also a word <DoHmoH> that means "drive back" (from KGT).

Never used in canon, although KGT comments that it's a "common militaristic 
act" (p.48), implying that it may only be used in military contexts.

Note that {DoH} is not the same thing as {HeD} "retreat, withdraw".  Its 
antonym appears to be {chol} "close in, get closer, come nearer" -- also 
probably used without {-Daq}.

>   <muDoH jagh> "the enemy backs off from me"
>   <jagh vIDoHmoH> "I drive back the enemy"

maj.

Generally, when Okrand includes a preposition as part of the definition, 
you don't kneed to use one of the "prepositional" suffixes to extend the 
meaning.  A good example is {Dab} "reside in/at, dwell in/at"

   qachvetlh vIDab
   I live in that building. (st.k 7/99)

   Qo'noS vIDab
   I live on Kronos. (st.k 7/99)

It's sometimes easier to think of these types of definitions without the 
preposition: e.g. {Dab} as "inhabit, occupy".  Okrand comments that

   In Klingon, when one lives in a place or dwells in a place, he
   or she is thought of as "occupying" or "inhabiting" that place;
   not doing something at that location, but doing something to it
   (occupying it).  (st.k 7/99)



-- 
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons

Back to archive top level