tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jan 04 09:12:49 2008
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
{-lu'} vs {-moH}
- From: Doq <[email protected]>
- Subject: {-lu'} vs {-moH}
- Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 12:10:46 -0500
- Authentication-results: smtp08.embarq.synacor.com [email protected]; spf=neutral
- Authentication-results: smtp08.embarq.synacor.com [email protected]; auth=pass (LOGIN)
- X_cmae_category: 0,0 Undefined,Undefined
Yep. Digging into this gets ugly.
The transitivity thing basically comes down to this:
If it is really a transitive verb that could be mistaken for an
intransitive verb because of usage with an indefinite object and you
want to use it intransitively, you need to use {-lu'}. If it is really
an intransitive verb and you want to use it transitively, then you
need to use {-moH}. Take {chagh} for instance.
I drop a rock. The rock drops. One usage is transitive. The other
usage is intransitive. If {chagh} is really intransitive in meaning,
then the first sentence needs to be {nagh vIchaghmoH}. If {chagh} is
really transitive, then the second sentence needs to be {nagh
chaghlu'}. If {chagh} exactly mimics the English "drop", then you can
say both {nagh vIchagh} and {chagh nagh}.
It would be a little disappointing if {chagh} exactly mimics "drop",
since we have these affixes that could cover the other meaning. If we
don't have one right meaning for this verb, Klingon loses both clarity
and efficiency if we waste affixes like this.
English seems particularly vague about these verbs of motion, like
"drop" or "move", though "ascend" and "descend" are only intransitive
in English, as are "accelerate" and "decelerate". Meanwhile, "lift" is
only transitive (or indefinite, but definitely not intransitive). But
Klingon doesn't have a word for "lift", except perhaps {SalmoH}. It
does have {chung}, {Sal} and {ghIr}.
So, of the Klingon verbs of motion that I can think of, all of them
are either intransitive or ambiguous in English. None are exclusively
transitive. So, would that suggest that in Klingon, the intransitive
versions of the verbs of motion are consistently what is intended?
Most likely, there are exclusively transitive Klingon verbs of motion
that I'm just not coming up with and someone else will prove that,
beyond a shadow of a doubt, many Klingon verbs of motion are exactly
as ambiguous about transitivity in Klingon as they are in English.
ghomeyDaq jIjatlhmo', jItlhIj.
Doq