tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Aug 08 23:03:29 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: Attending a school



In a message dated 8/3/1999 12:19:09 PM US Mountain Standard Time, 
[email protected] writes:

<< But I have trouble believing
 Klingons would do something so roundabout as stick the object of a
 transitive verb in a type-5 noun phrase.  Like I said, I can't properly
 justify this.  But I do quite consistently say things like "qep'a' vIjeS." >>
==========
I was on your side entirely until I ran into so many persons on this listserv 
telling me that I could use neither {jeS} nor {qIm} with a direct object.  My 
reasoning parallels yours in believing that Klingon verbs may be either 
transitive with one set of pronominals or intransitive with another set.  As 
to whether Klingons would convolute sentences to avoid using a direct object 
and using instead a "locative" construction, I would like to believe that 
both {jeS} and {qIm} may take direct objects, even though TKD did not 
specifically gloss these verbs with prepositional concepts included.

I feel there exists a lot evidence for your (and my former) viewpoint.  
Klingon verbs have felt to me all along as if they may take direct objects 
including the prepositional concept.  {ghoS}, when translated as "goes 
to/toward" is obvious.  The problem arose when we realized that "approaches" 
is one of the glosses; this translation of {ghoS} obviously can take a direct 
object.

In conclusion, without "proof" from MO himself, I will put myself out on a 
limb with those who have been criticizing me for using {jeS} with a direct 
object.  I will return to using it with a direct object, sensing that ~mark 
is "feeling" the Klingon language correctly.

peHruS


Back to archive top level