tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed May 27 18:03:55 2009

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: nuq bach?

qa'vaj (darqang99@gmail.com)



On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 8:52 PM, David Trimboli <david@trimboli.name> wrote:
>
> {-vaD} indicates a beneficiary, not a target. {HeSwI'vaD bach yaS} means
> "The officer shot (something) for the criminal."
>
>
I don't see the point being made here. {-vaD} also marks the indirect
object.  Given that Klingons consider the thing begin shot the direct object
of {bach}, it doesn't seem entirely unreasonable to take the thing being
shot at as the indirect object.  Even if the section 6.8 usage of {-vaD] is
ignored, the section 3.3.5 usage has <for, intended for>.  "The officer shot
(something) intended for the criminal" works in the English, at least.  The
only way I can see 3.3.5 excluding {-vaD} is to interpret that section as
restricting {-vaD} to only 'for' in a sense like  'for the benefit of' or
'in the interest of' or maybe 'on behalf of'.


-- 
qa'vaj
qo'lIj DachenmoHtaH






Back to archive top level