tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu May 09 05:36:44 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: pong



ghItlhpu' Marc Ruehlaender: 
\ I'm not sure... The Direct Object of the english verbs
\ "to call" and "to name" in the meaning they have in common
\ can only be the one who is named/called something -
\ at least according to my English Dictionary's Verb Patterns.
\ Thus the name is neither Subject nor Object and should
\ simply precede the Object.

Uhm, no.  The direct object of the English verb "to call" and "to name"
is the name.  The callee or namee is the indirect object. In English,
but apparently not in Klingon, nouns in a sentence can't just be there;
they have to be either a subject, an object (of the verb [direct or indirect] or of a
preposition), a predicate nominative, or a noun in apposition.  I think that
covers the possibilities, but I may have missed something.  In any
case, each noun must serve some grammatical function.

"Men call me . . . Tim."

Subject:         men
Verb:            call
Direct object:   Tim
Indirect object: me

Judging by canon examples, Klingon is not so picky about such matters,
so it's not necessary to say {jIHvaD *tIm ponglu'}; you can say {*tIm
muponglu'}.  I prefer the former form, but that's a personal choice.
Of course, the easy way out of the whole mess is to use the noun {pong}
instead of the verb, and say {*tIm 'oH pongwIj'e'}.



Back to archive top level