Re: Complex Sentences

["William H. Martin" <whm2m@server1.mail.virginia.edu>]

On Wed, 10 Feb 1999 13:30:47 -0800 (PST) Steven Boozer 
<sboozer@midway.uchicago.edu> wrote:
... 
> {loD naQ} "the whole man, the entire man"

Or, "the man's stick". {{:)>

...  
> : >The sentence said "go home" not "come home" so it should be <jaH>
> : 
> : ghoS  is more than just come.  Sure jaH can be used.
> : ghoS doesn't really have an english equivalent.
> : ghoS:  approach, go away from, proceed, come, follow (a course), thrust
> : 
> : DloraH
> 
> You can also use {chegh} "return".  From how Marc Okrand has used {chegh} in canon:
> 
> 	ghorgh pa'wIjDaq jIchegh? 
> 	When can I return to my room? CK
> 
> 	DaH machegh. 
> 	[We're returning now. (untr.)] ST6
> 
> 	wa'leS jIchegh 
> 	Tomorrow I will return. KGT

Thanks, as always, voragh. It really helps to have these 
examples.
 
> we do know that it refers to movement, not the return of an 
> item.  (For that you would say {nobHa'} "give back".)  

This also presents pretty strong evidence that it is normally 
used intransitively. I don't think we have more than three 
examples of any other verb of motion, so this is actually quite 
a lot of canon.
 
> BTW, there is currently a debate as to whether {chegh} behaves 
> like {ghoS} and {jaH}, for which {-Daq} is permitted though 
> not recommended.  A matter of style, apparently most Klingons 
> consider it redundant - rather like "exit from the aircraft" 
> in English, which is unfortunately becoming common, at least 
> here in the US. 

That's ALMOST the case. It is not that you can use one of these 
verbs intransitively and omit the {-Daq}. It is that these verbs 
can be use transitively with or without the {-Daq} on the direct 
object, or they can be used intransitively with the {-Daq} as a 
locative (not direct object). Okrand stressed this in the 
interview, both by emphasis and repetition. If the verb is used 
intrasitively, then a noun without {-Daq} would have no 
grammatic function in the sentence.

Since {chegh} has only been shown with intransitive usage, the 
case that it behaves like {ghoS} is a weak one.

> A few more examples - or a statement from 
> Maltz - would settle the matter.  But then, that would give us 
> nothing to argue about here on the list.
 
Three canon examples ought to be enough. 
 
> -- 
> Voragh                       
> Ca'Non Master of the Klingons

charghwI' 'utlh