tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jan 14 13:43:22 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: KLBC: HovqIj jun Hov wov

lab peHruS:

> In a message dated 1/14/1999 12:27:15 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
> [email protected] writes:

> << The full, formal answer would probably be <naDev vIDab>, but in a less
>  formal setting, I can see how the shorter <jIDab> might work.
>  >>

> I believe even in formal settings that would be <naDev jIDab>.  
> The adverbial noun <naDev> obviously is not the object of the 
> sentence.  I am not specifying any object.  In parallel to 
> <bIjatlh 'e' yImev> I might say "You can't live here" as 
> <naDev bIDab 'e' chaw'lu'be'>.

Why not? <naDev> is a noun meaning "here, hereabouts", and <Dab> is a verb
taking a place as its object. It's true that <naDev> includes a locative
sense in its meaning, so it can act as a locative without a <-Daq> suffix,
but I see no reason it cannot be the object of a verb if it makes sense as
the object.

I see a subtle but important difference between <naDev jIDab> and <naDev
vIDab>. The first is saying that my home, which is not important to that
particular sentence, is somewhere in the area described by <naDev>. That
area could be as small as a few square feet (or 'ujmey), or as large as a
planet, depending on the context. It does not attach any particular sense of
ownership to the <naDev> area - just that my home is somewhere in it. <naDev
vIDab>, on the other hand, says that the <naDev> area *is* my home. In this
case, if the area is something larger than a dwelling, the sentence may take
on a bit more meaning - the speaker is identifying himself with the area.

As an example, if I were standing on the street, not close to any house in
particular, and someone said <naDev jIDab>, I would assume his house was
somewhere in the vicinity. However, if someone said <naDev vIDab>, I would
think he lived *in the street*.

This same argument could be applied to any form of <X-Daq jIDab> vs. <X
vIDab>.

Also, I don't know if <'e' X-lu'> is outright illegal, but <net X> is
certainly prefferable. Also, consider <tuch> instead of <chaw'be'>.


pagh
Beginners' Grammarian

Back to archive top level