tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Nov 30 09:10:41 2001

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: KLBC - mojaQmey vIqeq

..
> > mapupegh
> > We kicked ourselves.
> 
> The suffix -'egh has a ' with it.
> mapup'egh

I've seen a couple people making this mistake recently. It is good to note that 
in one place in TKD, the glottal stop {'} was omitted. This is a known error in 
TKD. Every other reference to {-'egh} includes the glottal stop.
.. 
> > Qe' vIqetlI'
> > I am running to the restaurant. (With the intent of stopping there.)
> 
> As far as we know, qet is "run", not "run (to)".
> Qe'Daq jIqetlI' - this can have two meanings.  Either you are running TO the
> restaurant, or you are IN the restaurant running around inside.
> We could use two sentences:
> jIqet.  Qe' vIghoS.
> I'm running.  I'm going to the restaurant.

I'm pretty sure that {Qe'Daq jIqetlI'} can only mean that you are in the 
restaurant and you are running. While I am also unsure of whether {qet} is one 
of the verbs of motion that behaves like {ghoS} and can take a destination as a 
direct object (I believe this verb is addressed in the HolQeD interview with 
Okrand on this topic, but my memory is not that good), I do feel fairly certain 
about the following. One of the two cases exist:

1. {qet} works like {ghoS} and to say "I am running to the restaurant" would be 
stated either as {Qe' vIqetlI'} or {Qe'Daq vIqetlI'}. Both sentences are 
equally valid, though the second version is a bit more redundant.

2. {qet} does not work like {ghoS} and there is no way to say "I am running to 
the restaurant" without recasting, likely into two sentences. {Qe' vIghoS. 
jIqetlI'.}

In either of these two cases, {Qe'Daq jIqetlI'} can only mean "I'm at the 
restaurant and I'm running." The restaurant is not the destination.

> > yaS vI'oy'pu'
> > I have hurt the officer. (Possibly by accident.)
> >
> > yaS vI'oy'ta'
> > I have hurt the officer. (With explicit intent to harm him.)
> 
> With these two sentences you need the suffix -moH "cause"
> yaS vI'oy'moH(pu'/ta')
 
I'm pretty sure that Okrand has used {'oy'} both with and without direct 
objects. While using {-moH} is a safe way to go, and certainly valid, I don't 
think it is necessary.

I wish Okrand had been consistent in his use of {'oy'}, but I'm pretty sure he 
has been just as vague about the transitivity of this verb as we are in English 
with "hurt". My wrist hurts. I hurt my wrist.
..
> Overall, you do a good job.  Only minor errors.
 
Overall, you do a GREAT job. Only minor errors.
 
> DloraH, BG

charghwI'

Back to archive top level