tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Mar 30 08:13:20 2004
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: -Daq, subject, object
Dar'Qang:
> > In the sentence:
> > lojmItDaq puqbe'wI' vIlegh.
> > Is there a standard, or default interpretation as to who would be at
> > the door?
ngabwI':
>I have always had the impression that {-Daq} marks the location of the
>action of the verb:
Often true, but not always. Okrand on {-Daq}:
This suffix indicates that something is happening (or has happened
or will happen) in the vicinity of the noun to which it is attached.
It is normally translated by an English preposition: "to, in, at,
on." The exact translation is determined by the meaning OF THE
WHOLE SENTENCE." (TKD 27f., emphasis added)
Examples where {Daq} refers to the location of the object, not the subject
(assuming they're in different locations):
Qo'noS wa'Daq baHta' ['entepray']
"Enterprise fired on Kronos One..." ST6
mIvwIjDaq poghlIj vIcha'
I display your glove on my helmet. KGT
raSDaq jengva' vItatlh
I return the plate to the table. (st.k 7/99)
Note too:
When used with nouns with the locative suffix {-Daq}, the finger verbs
mean "point (with a specific finger) at or towards". (HQ 10.2:8)
maghwI'Daq jISIq
I point at the traitor with my index finger.
I point out the traitor with my index finger. (HQ 10.2:11)
maghwI'Daq SIq naQjejwIj
My spear points at the traitor.
I point at the traitor with my spear. (HQ 10.2:11)
Dar'Qang's example is therefore ambiguous; either the speaker, his/her
daughter, or both of them could be at the door -- exactly as in
English. You have to rely on context - i.e. the previous or following
sentence(s) - to know for certain. But this is not a problem since no
statement is completely without context... except concocted examples in
grammar books!
--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons