tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Feb 24 11:20:09 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: qama'
- From: TPO <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: qama'
- Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 14:20:04 -0500
>While we're at it: the correct question would be {nuq DaghoS}. "What are you
>approaching?" Use the direct object. The only reason we speakers of English
>even consider "Where are you going?" probably needing a locative-type question
>and matching answer is that we think of {ghoS}'s having other meanings besides
>"approaches." "Goes to" includes a prepositional word in English. But, look
>at the verb as one unit, not as a verb plus a prepostion.
>
>Can we say {nuqDaq DaghoS?} without merely being redundant. After all, using
>{-Daq} after the verb {ghoS} is "somewhat redundant, but not out and out
>wrong." (TKD p28) The answer still would not require a locative construction.
>If the answer did include {-Daq}, the answer would be "somewhat redundant, but
>not out and out wrong." Reading TKD p69, I get the feeling that {nuqDaq}
>questions and {-Daq} answers mean the action takes place at that location.
In the last MO interview he said you can have
noun DaghoS
noun-Daq bIghoS
noun-Daq DaghoS (which means the same as noun DaghoS)
but you cannot have: noun bIghoS
Yes, the -Daq with Da- is redundent, but is allowed
So with ...DaghoS, you can use nuq or nuqDaq
perhaps nuq would be used when approaching a thing
nuqDaq (what place) would be used when approaching a place
DloraH