tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Nov 14 18:26:48 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: Using -Daq (was RE: KLBC: Translation)
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: Using -Daq (was RE: KLBC: Translation)
- Date: Thu, 14 Nov 96 23:40:26 UT
jatlh voragh:
> >Only the three words {pa'} (only in the sense of "thereabouts"), {naDev},
> and
> >{Dat} have the location built-in and therefore cannot use {-Daq}. So,
yes,
> >{DaqDaq} is a legitimate word.
>
> "Cannot" is too strong. "Need not" would be more apt.
TKD p. 27: "Unlike other nouns, these three words are never followed by the
locative suffix."
> In a bar, the visiting Terran hears a commotion and asks his Klingon
escort:
> pa'Daq qaStaH nuq
> What's happening over there? (CK)
Yes, I had forgotten this example. I, of course, believe it is simply an
error.
> And, in a related usage, you can use -vo' with naDev:
This is quite true, and I never said you couldn't. In fact, my translation
{naDevvo' pa' bIjaHlaHbe'}, uses it. However, I don't agree that being able
to use {-vo'} justifies using {-Daq}. These three nouns have a locative sense
built in, but not an "away from" sense. The latter needs to be added with a
suffix.
SuStel
BG
Stardate 96873.3