tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jan 24 15:19:52 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: chu' mu'mey nuqDaq vItu'laH'a'
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: chu' mu'mey nuqDaq vItu'laH'a'
- Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 18:19:48 -0500 (EST)
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> from "Garrett Michael Hayes" at Jan 24, 96 07:14:53 am
According to Garrett Michael Hayes:
>
> On 23 Jan 96 at 15:53, Alan Anderson wrote:
>
> > 'etlhqengwI' writes:
> > >But how would I say something like... "Help me out. Show it to
> > >him!", where "he" is the recipient of the action, but it is for *my*
> > >benefit?
> >
> > I don't know about *you*, but I would say {choQaHmeH ghaHvaD 'oH yI'ang}.
>
> That works, but doesn't "-vaD" still carry the sense of doing the
> showing "for" him, rather than just "to" him? Let me be clear - I
> don't think we are talking about any great question of grammar here -
> just an issue of tone.
The action of "showing" is FOR him. The purpose of the showing
for him is to help me. The tone seems quite correct. There are
two actions here. The object of helping is me. The indirect
object of showing is him. So what is the problem?
>
> Garrett Michael Hayes; Client/Server Labs
> 8601 Dunwoody Place, Suite 332, Atlanta, GA 30350
> [email protected], http://www.cslinc.com
> 770-552-3645 voice, 770-993-4667 fax
charghwI'
--
\___
o_/ \
<\__,\
"> | Get a grip.
` |