tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Nov 13 15:13:23 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: TLHINGAN-HOL digest 753



Thus spake you, [email protected]:
 
> Date: Tue, 12 Nov 96 22:54:36 UT
> From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: KLBC: Translation
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
 
> >  >>  ram Daq DajaHbogh pa' jIHtaHmo'.
> >  >Nick would disagree with me on this, but you probably need to say {Daq 
> >  >DaghoSbogh}.  I don't believe there is any canon to say that {jaH} can 
> >  >take an object.

I still disagree, because I think this is an unduly restrictive reading of
TKD. The dictionary says ghoS *and other directional verbs* need not take
-Daq. As far as I can see it, if one directional verb other than ghoS can
take no -Daq, it's jaH. David and I have locked horns on this in Much Ado,
and I've referred it to Mark for arbitration :-) .

> What I'm saying is that {jaH} does not take an object.  Just as you don't say 
> "I go the Great Hall," you also don't say *{vaS'a' vIjaH}.  You say "I go *to*
> the Great Hall" {vaS'a'Daq jIjaH}.  You can also say "I approach the Great 
> Hall" {vaS'a' vIghoS}.  You *could* say "I approach to the Great Hall" 
> {vaS'a'Daq jIghoS}, but it's a little redundant.

David, you already know how much esteem I have for arguing Klingon syntax
from English syntax...

As for 'forgive', I myself have used noDHa' in _Mark_; is that what people
have been thinking of?

-- 
http://daemon.apana.org.au/~opoudjis          NICK NICHOLAS;  LINGUISTICS,
UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE              [email protected]
 "Some of the English might say that the Irish orthography is very Irish.
 Personally, I have a lot of respect for a people who can create something
 so grotesque." -- Andrew Rosta


Back to archive top level