tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jul 11 11:12:37 2000
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Raise Your betleH to the Stars.....
jatlh peHruS:
>While TKD 3.3.5 Syntactic markers clearly explains that ghunchu'wI' is
>correct that
>{-Daq} is the correct type 5 for "to, at, in, on," and the original author
is
>correct that two nouns may form a noun-noun compound (recently elsewhere
>referred to as genitive, per sé for this topic) with noun 1 possessing noun
>2, producing {Hovmey lurgh} for "stars' direction," we can add both
concepts
>together now to give {Hovmey lurghDaq} "to the stars' direction." Does
this
>not mean "toward the stars"?
I think the matter in question is whether it makes sense to talk about the
"location" of a particular "direction." A direction does not have a
location. Assuming an infinite plane, you can stand anywhere and north is
still north.
However, I'm not terribly opposed to /Hovmey lurghDaq/ in general. It makes
sense to me, when one considers /lurgh/ to be referring to a vague
destination. But whether it's allowed or not, a valid objection is raised
when one thinks of this sentence in the original context: /Hovmey lurghDaq
betleHlIj yIpep/. Without careful thought, this very much looks like "At
the stars' direction, raise your bat'leth," as if /lurgh/ were a place.
SuStel
Stardate 527.7