tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Dec 05 00:21:20 2007

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Basic grammar question

QeS 'utlh (

jIghItlhpu', jIja':
>(Personally, I feel that usage of the suffix {-vaD} as a dative, rather
>than as a benefactive - which, according to TKD (see p. 28), is what
>it strictly is - is a more concerning Englishism than the prefix trick,
>and I prefer to express purely dative arguments with the prefix trick
>where I can. Just my two cents.)

Of course, it's unavoidable that in some instances I have to use {-vaD} to express datives, since it's pretty clear that Okrand wound up having to use it in such a manner in things like {ghaHvaD taj vInob} "I give the knife to him".

mujang Qang qu'wI', ja':
>I'm really intrigued by this idea.  I don't fully comprehend the formal
>linguistic terminology - but I can go do a little research on that and
>then think through what you've said.

qachuH. {{:)

"Dative" is is any argument that's characteristically expressed by the English preposition "to", as in "I gave it to him", "I threw it to him", "I did it to him". "Benefactive" is any argument that's expressed by the English "for": "I did it for him", "I threw it for him", "I gave it to him for her".

>I think that you're describing a way to switch between using the prefix
>trick and -vaD in a manner that is sort of opposite of the way the
>corresponding ideas are used in English.

I'm not sure what you mean. Could you explain?

QeS 'utlh
tlhIngan Hol yejHaD pab po'wI' / Grammarian of the Klingon Language Institute

not nItoj Hemey ngo' juppu' ngo' je
(Old roads and old friends will never deceive you)
- Ubykh Hol vIttlhegh

What are you waiting for? Join Lavalife FREE

Back to archive top level