tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jul 03 13:06:39 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: Go back three spaces...
This is a good point well argued. As is often the case, I have
my own different perspective as well.
According to [email protected]:
>
> In a message dated 97-06-26 22:30:24 EDT, SuStel writes:
>
> << ..can the distance or method of movement be the object of the sentence?
>
> I don't think so. That's why I like your use of {ghoS} so much. Still, as
> slightly clipped commands, you could make this: {yIHeD. wej yoSmey.}
> >>
>
> Looks like we have yet another disagreement coming.
>
> I feel amounts, including those measuring distance, may be objects of verbs.
> I certainly prefer {loS qelI'qam qet HughDu' SIjbogh loD}.
They don't have to be objects of verbs. Like locatives, time
stamps and other nouns which somehow place or set the
environment, they can simply preceed the verb (and its object,
if there is one) and fit quite nicely into the current grammar.
In fact, in your very example, because of the ambiguity of the
null prefix, the example may be correct while the verb is quite
intransitive. I'll modify it a little:
wa'Hu' jupwI' juHDaq loS qelIqam jIqet. "Yesterday, I walked
four kelicams to my friend's house."
I didn't walk the four kelicams any more than I walked the
yesterday or walked the to my friend's house. I just walked.
Four kelicams is just how far I walked, just like yesterday
is when I walked and to my friend's house is where I walked.
They set the environment for the action. They are not
necessarily the object of the action.
> The problem in tlhIngan Hol is that we lack so many words for measurements.
> No "quarts, gallons, tons, pounds, feet, etc."
jIQochbe'chu'!
> peHruS
charghwI'