tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jul 13 07:49:10 2000
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Deixis and direction
David Trimboli wrote:
>
> jatlh peHruS:
> > I cannot say that "redundant but not out-and-out wrong" so-called
> > locative/direct object predicates when there is a verb of motion will
> > disappear by edict from MO. But, I think he is considering "cleaning up"
> > some of the earlier "mistakes." {-Daq} will become locative only and
> verbs
> > of motion will take direct objects without employing {-Daq}. The only
> "soft"
> > evidence I have is that more and more verbs are being confirmed as capable
> of
> > taking direct objects.
>
> Actually, verbs of motion taking /-Daq/ nouns as an object is a recent
> development.
The most interesting verb in this sense is ofcourse /ghoS/, for you can
go TO somewhere, and also FROM somewhere. If you use /ghoS/ with a
direct object, it isn't obviously clear whether you're going TO or FROM
that object, while /-vo'/ and /-Daq/ nouns would make that clear, even
allowing you to express a motion from A to B... Personally I would say
that /ghoS/, if used with a direct object without either /-Daq/ or
/-vo'/ would indicate a motion TO that object, but how a Dutchman thinks
isn't necessarily what a Klingon thinks, though some would say Dutch
does sound like Klingon *grin*.
--
Albert Arendsen --- aka --- Reyn Eaglestorm
>>>>> The Gods have a sense of humour <<<<<
>>>>> So be sure you don't lose yours <<<<<
http://home.student.utwente.nl/a.a.arendsen