tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jan 05 09:10:15 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>
No, I'm really not, but I'm ashamed that there must be sufficient
careless ghoS/jaH errors in my writing that you think I don't get the
idea of ghoS. Like you, I was using Klingon before we had clarification
on when to use -Daq with certain verbs, and some constructions have
carried over. <br><br>
The object of ghoS is a location. nuqDaq is a word that you put in
a sentence in place of a location in order to ask for the identity of the
missing location. If I can build a correct declarative sentence
using ghoS, I can build one using nuqDaq.<br><br>
nuq is a word you put in a sentence in place of an object or a concept,
to ask for the identity of it. An object can be a destination, so I don't
reject nuq DaghoS, but a location can too, so I accept nuqDaq DaghoS
too.<br><br>
- Qov<br><br>
Sorry you got this twice, lojmIt tIwI' nuv - forgot to hit reply-all the
first time.<br><br>
At 08:44 05/01/2012, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">To put it another way:<br><br>
nuqDaq DaghoS?<br><br>
is much more closely related to:<br><br>
nuqDaq bIHtaH?<br><br>
than it is to:<br><br>
nuq DaghoS?<br><br>
which is more closely related to:<br><br>
nuq DaqIp?<br><br>
Is it clear yet?<br><br>
Your destination is the thing that you {ghoS}. It's not the place where
you {ghoS}.<br><br>
You are clinging to the way this question is asked in English instead of
thinking about what the question really means.<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