tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jan 05 09:06:18 2012
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] nuq bop bom: 'ay' wa'vatlh wa'maH cha': <SuchwI' chaw'>
<html>
<body>
I have no argument with the going-to sense, nor with any of the examples
you discuss; although I won't deny occasionally making errors with
declarative sentences, they are errors, not misunderstandings.<br><br>
Our difference lies in what nuqDaq means. ghunchu'wI' and you seem
to see it as meaning "nuq+locative" i.e. to-place or at-place,
in the manner of puchpa'Daq or Qo'noSDaq. I see it as meaning simply
"place", with an interrogative slant, perhaps with an etymology
in the manner of QongDaq.<br><br>
nuqDaq DaghoS?<br><br>
Daqvetlh vIghoS.<br><br>
Daqvetlh replaces nuqDaq with no change of grammar, just as Qel replaces
'Iv below.<br><br>
'Iv DaghoS?<br><br>
Qel vIghoS.<br><br>
I think nuqDaq is the exact interrogative equivalent of any named
destination. You, I understand, think it's the interrogative destination
nuq plus the locative suffix -Daq. As far as I can tell we disagree on
that point only. <br><br>
You may argue that nuqDaq is also the interrogative equivalent of
QongDaqDaq and that as we don't say {nuqDaqDaq QottaH HoD} that the
syllable Daq in QongDaq is a removable locative suffix. I don't believe
that. I think that nuqDaq, like naDev can be a direct object or a
location without adding or removing a suffix.<br><br>
I also understand that nuqDaq DaghoS becomes ambiguous in that the
question could refer to either the location of the full path or of the
destination, but then same with the answer, if it's pa' or
naDev.<br><br>
- Qov<br><br>
At 08:35 05/01/2012, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">In English, the question
referring to your destination is a location because that's the
relationship between English verbs of motion and their destination. So,
in English the question word is "Where". But in Klingon, using
the verb {ghoS}, the destination is not a location of the noun. It's the
noun itself.<br><br>
Let me try again.<br><br>
English:<br><br>
"Where are you going?"<br><br>
"I'm going to my workplace."<br><br>
In Klingon, the verb doesn't mean "going", such that you add
the helper word "to" after it to explain the relationship
between "going" and "workplace". In Klingon, the verb
MEANS "going-to". So, the Klingon equivalent question is:<br>
<br>
"What are you going-to?"<br><br>
"I'm going-to my workplace."<br><br>
It would be poor form to say, "I'm going-to to my workplace,"
so it is poor form to ask, "Where are you going-to?"<br><br>
See?<br><br>
You want a prepositional relationship between the "going" verb
and the location the subject is going to, but in Klingon, it's not a
prepositional relationship. It's a direct object.<br><br>
This is similar to the English "orbit" vs. "go
around". The moon orbits the Earth. It also "goes around"
the Earth. You can say that it orbits around the Earth, but that's an odd
and unnecessary redundancy, and Klingon doesn't really encourage a lot of
redundancy.<br><br>
All verbs with direct objects really have prepositional relationships
with their direct object that are implicitly part of the definition of
the verb, but the implication of the prepositional relationship built
into the definition of the word effectively gives us a null preposition.
All a preposition does is explain the relationship between the verb and
the noun, and with direct objects, you don't need that helper word. You
know there's a noun that has that relationship with the verb, and that
relationship is so common, you don't even have to explain it. Just put
the noun there, and we know what to do with it.<br><br>
That's what makes {ghoS} so interesting. It's a non-English (and probably
non-most-human-languages) relationship between a verb describing a
person's moving along a path and the noun on the path that marks the
destination of the path, or possibly even some other point on the path
that the path would be recognized by. That last part is pretty vague.
Okrand talked about it without giving any examples.<br><br>
pItlh<br>
lojmIt tI'wI'nuv<br><br>
<br><br>
On Jan 5, 2012, at 10:07 AM, Qov wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">I understand the arguments
against nuqDaq DaghoS, but to me the answer to nuq DaghoS is
{tlhoy'vetlh} or {chob'a'vam}, not jonwI' choQ.<br><br>
Has nuq ever been used in canon as a destination? Has interrogative
where ever been translated without nuqDaq?<br><br>
I'll evade here with {nuq 'oH ghochlIj'e', HoD?}<br><br>
How would you feel about {nuqDaq DajaH?}?<br><br>
I really like these discussions and don't ever feel that I'm being
nitpicked whether it's a mere qaghwI' or a using a verb against
canon.<br><br>
- Qov<br><br>
At 06:49 05/01/2012, lojmIt tI'wI'nuv wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">I disagree about {nuqDaq DaghoS}
vs. {nuq DaghoS}. I think either is acceptable and can be understood, but
{nuq DaghoS} is preferable if you want to know the target of one's
travel, while {nuqDaq DaghoS} is preferable if you want to identify a
larger location that contains the entire path one travels to get
there.<br><br>
Remember that Okrand has explained to us that {ghoS} doesn't just mean to
go somewhere. It means to move along a path from something to something.
The direct object is an object located somewhere along the path, most
typically, the goal location. It's the thing that, for the purposes of
the sentence, the path is named after.<br><br>
If you add {-Daq}, then the noun isn't a direct object of {ghoS}, it's
the location that includes the path one travels upon while one
{ghoS}s.<br><br>
In My Humble Opinion.<br><br>
I think he actually gave an example that {bIQtIq vIghoS} means "I am
going to the river," or "I'm traversing a path that includes
the river, probably as its destination," while {bIQtIqDaq vIghoS}
means "I'm in the river and I'm going somewhere." Also note
that {bIQtIqDaq jIghoS} is a perfectly formed sentence, while {bIQtIQ
jIghoS} is not. This implies that {bIQtIqDaq vIghoS} has an unstated
direct object, while {bIQtIQDaq} is the location of the action of the
verb, not its direct object.<br><br>
That's the key. If I ask {nuqDaq DaghoS?}, then I'm not asking where you
are headed. I'm asking everywhere you've been and intend to go. I want
the broader, all-inclusive location you are traveling in; the entire
zone, not just the direction.<br><br>
pItlh<br>
lojmIt tI'wI'nuv<br><br>
<br><br>
On Jan 4, 2012, at 5:35 PM, Qov wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Hey, I missed you. You're part
of the creative process now. :-)<br><br>
At 13:50 04/01/2012, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 1:53 PM,
Qov
<<a href="mailto:[email protected]";>[email protected]</a>>
wrote:<br>
> ngo' Duj 'ach veQ 'oHbe'bej.<br><br>
Do' veQDuj 'oHbe' veS'e'.</blockquote><br>
lInDab Duj 'oH. 'ach Qu'DajvaD thoy ngo'.<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">> "nuqDaq DaghoS,
HoD?"<br><br>
'utbe' <-Daq> qar'a'? I'm getting a "from whence" vibe
here.</blockquote><br>
jIQoch. I'm pretty sure nuqDaq is a chunk like QongDaq, not the same word
as, say nuqDaq DaQeq = what are you aiming at. If there were
numerous objects in the room and you had to pick one to approach then
sure, nuq DaghoS, but "Where are you going?" = nuqDaq
DaghoS.<br><br>
<font color="#00721E">...<br>
</font>- Qov<br><br>
<br><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Tlhingan-hol mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:[email protected]";>
[email protected]</a><br>
<a href="http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol"; eudora="autourl">
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol</a>
</blockquote></blockquote>
_______________________________________________<br>
Tlhingan-hol mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:[email protected]";>
[email protected]</a><br>
<a href="http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol"; eudora="autourl">
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol</a>
</blockquote></blockquote></body>
</html>
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
[email protected]
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol