tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jan 25 06:59:22 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: chu' mu'mey nuqDaq vItu'laH'a'
- From: "Garrett Michael Hayes" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: chu' mu'mey nuqDaq vItu'laH'a'
- Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 09:15:55 -0500
- Organization: Client/Server Labs
- Priority: normal
On 24 Jan 96 at 23:12, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
> >Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 15:22:15 -0800
> >From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
<pe'>
>
> >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?
>
> See also something in the addendum; I'm sure it mentions "give the knife to
> the prisoner" as "qama'vaD taj yInob." Although I have the lexicon here, I
> did not bring my actual paper TKD here to USENIX (horror!)
You are correct. It is on page 180 (Section 6.8) and translated as
"The prisoner gave the officer the knife." I guess where I got hung
up is one the explanatory text above where Okrand says " the indirect
object may be considered the *beneficiary*" (emphasis added)
I was apparently inferring more from that than was warranted.
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