tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Oct 17 12:45:47 2005
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: targhmey
naHQun:
> > {nuqDaq 'oH targh'e'?}
> > {bIQtIqDaq 'oH'a'?}
> > {bIQtIqDaq 'oH'a' targh'e'?} ??
ghunchu'wI':
>maj. I'd suggest putting {-taH} on the pronoun/verb, to emphasize
>that the location is a continuing thing rather than a simple fact of
>being. That seems to be the conventional thing to do when using
>pronouns to indicate "be at a place".
More than conventional style, it seems to actually be a rule - albeit one
that's undocumented in either TKD or KGT. EVERY pronoun-as-verb example
indicating "be at a place" has {-taH} on the pronoun. AFAIK there are no
exceptions.
OTOH if you use the more general {tu'lu'} "there is/are" to indicate
location, you don't need to tag it with {-taH}. I just checked my notes
and there are NO examples of the form *{tu'lu'taH}, which is curious
considering the suffixes {-lu'taH} can and do occur on other verbs - most
famously {batlh Daqawlu'taH}.
Thus:
bIQtIQDaq targh tu'lu'.
There's a targ in the river.
bIQtIQDaq 'oHtaH targh'e'.
The targ is in the river.
--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons