tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Jan 28 13:30:17 2001

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

"cat in the hat" (was Re: -vo')



ja'pu' SarrIS:
>{-vo'} is like {-Daq} in that it gives the location reference of the verb,
>not to a noun without a verb. Some people refer to this as the "Cat in the
>hat" problem. Without a verb, you can't translate "cat in the hat" because
>{mIvDaq} gives the location of some action, not of the cat itself.

ja' peHruS:
>For "The man sees the cat in the hat" I have submitted {mIvDaq 'oHtaHbogh
>vIghro' legh loD}.  But no one has approved this construction, to my
>knowledge.

What's to approve?  It's missing an {-'e'} on the subject of a "to-be"
verb, but with that corrected it is an appropriate translation of "cat in
the hat" -- if you're talking about a v'gro [cat] which is actually in the
process of being located in (or on or at) a helmet [hat].

If you're talking about the cat who is wearing a hat, that construction is
not very good.  {mIv tuqtaHbogh vIghro'} is much more appropriate.  The
Doctor Seuss character is arguably a cat who wears a hat, making {mIv
tuqbogh vIghro'} a somewhat better phrase.  But if you're talking about the
cat's being identified by the hat, which is in my opinion the correct
concept here, a simple {mIv vIghro'} is fine.

-- ghunchu'wI' 'utlh




Back to archive top level