tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Feb 27 01:29:35 2006
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
{ghung} and {'oj} as stative verbs?
- From: "Philip Newton" <[email protected]>
- Subject: {ghung} and {'oj} as stative verbs?
- Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 10:29:22 +0100
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=SO385Zir5q9nWGq4Jqo/UHAttt05vFZR7t7St0KEyV1+DsCSMWD21AxBrmJl27xatuCn1uk7UpRfRiPPPp3DrLF0txcomwpLltl36//i4aGRpS4wXzkzUQEadVPTuF/VB4DOhMJIsFv+oDS1soilsObVGz7P/SgFjE3XbRYwodo=
{ghung} and {'oj} appear to be intransitive verbs.
What I'm wondering is whether they can be stative verbs and, hence,
can be used like adjectives -- after all, they do describe a state. So
I'm wondering whether {SuvwI' ghung} would be grammatically correct
and would mean "the hungry warrior". Or {'Iwghargh 'oj Sop tlhIngan
ghung} for "the hungry Klingon eats the thirsty bloodworm".
(I started thinking about this while considering how various languages
describe being hungry ... English uses an adjective "to be hungry",
German, French, and Spanish talk about possessing hunger "Hunger
haben, avoir faim, tener hambre", and I thought at first that Klingon
uses a verb "jIghung"... but then I considered whether it might be the
same construction as English, since predicate adjectives work like
verbs in Klingon, so {jIghung} might well be "I am hungry" rather than
"I hunger". AFAIK Esperanto uses true verbs, though; the word for "be
hungry" escapes me but I believe "to be thirsty" is {soifi}.)
--
Philip Newton <[email protected]>
HovpoH 5381.97
![[KLI Member]](/pics/KLImemberbutton.gif "[KLI Member]"){kind=small}
![[Hol ghojwI']](/pics/level2_big.png "[Hol ghojwI']"){kind=small}