tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Nov 02 21:59:06 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: jab
- From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: jab
- Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1998 00:45:12 -0500
- In-Reply-To: <7107ECAEC9ECD0119BBC00805F684B9C2492C9@VIPER>
mujang pagh:
>> Since the object of {jab} is supposed to be food, I get a really odd
>> image when I see {HIjab}. Perhaps a dish of qagh might say {ghojab},
>> but I think a group of diners should say {yIjab}.
>
>I think of this as a simple application of the indirect object prefix trick,
>and it seems quite natural to me.
It's less simple than it might be. Since there's no explicit direct object,
the use of the indirect object prefix isn't immediately obvious. I would
probably be able to get to the intended meaning quickly, but I'd have to go
through a "put me on the table to be eaten" interpretation on the way there.
-- ghunchu'wI'