tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue May 30 21:44:18 2000
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: (KLBC) Use of {-vaD}
ja' ghaHbe'wI':
>paghvaD Hon wa' vIghelmeH jabbI'IDvam vIqonta'. lugh'a' mu'tlheghmey veb:
chaq lugh, 'ach QIv 'e' vIQub jIH.
>1) jIHvaD 'IH mara.
This might makes me think that Mara is all dolled up for a date with you.
It might be better to say something like {'IH mara 'e' vIQub}.
>2) ghot law'vaD moH Humanpu'.
While I'm able to tease the intended meaning out of this, I don't like it
much at all. Like the first one, {moH Humanpu' 'e' luQub ghot law'} or a
similar phrase.
>1a) To me {mara} is pretty.
> (I believe that {mara} is pretty)
>
>2a) To many people Humans are ugly.
> (Many people believe that Humans are ugly)
>
>I'm applying Latin grammar to {tlhIngan Hol}, specifically the dative case
>to the the noun sufix {-vaD}. I know that it is the kind of thing one must
>avoid, but to me both sentences make sense...
Why not say it the way you have explained it in parentheses? The {-vaD}
suffix is supposed to indicate the beneficiary of an action, and its use
as an indirect-object marker probably shouldn't be expanded beyond that.
-- ghunchu'wI' 'utlh