tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Sep 02 11:37:40 2012
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Tlhingan-hol] how does {-Ha'} work on verbs that affect multiple objects?
- From: "De'vID" <[email protected]>
- Subject: [Tlhingan-hol] how does {-Ha'} work on verbs that affect multiple objects?
- Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2012 20:37:30 +0200
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=wh5ttr+wSpdGwm1UgPUZP+NPRKZAN9HPwAQcTuEA83Y=; b=Nl54gm5T2kghrwf1XOG2egYYUKJJ7ntAScQEGxdRP8mEkcruBM5Ab1FZ7mJYajr0/7 HUAkiI36Ea1uim4QZgmjV+OJ4occQ1iZMfl57fcEXvetLN1t7F2NgWujXd51vtjWtzbK ullfXYwwAMuJg5KMe36qRZve3bjDnQBfUNkKrTcBoOIR5GaIbDI+Cx2EBsbJBLuVn4Ht Oi+0PNaroAzLg0lx5gl3A6nv/8bteteDkY2f60qsNEf/cXiUe/rcXtxiP9OLT0iJOXe2 b0YjCqwFls6DibyEY4PVCngTOZfr2JbE/IfPOlPb5/ZN5AlWZGYT5mOO4pzXSvMMqmvM kJhA==
- List-archive: <http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/>
- List-id: <tlhingan-hol.stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
- List-subscribe: <http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol>, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=subscribe>
A fellow Klingonist (jaSwa') and I are having a discussion about
{-Ha'} off-list. He raised some interesting questions about {-Ha'},
which (with his permission) I thought I'd share.
The discussion started with {nobHa'}, defined as "give back, return"
in KGT. TKW p.189 has:
{Huch nobHa'bogh verenganpu''e' yIvoqQo'} "Don't trust Ferengi who
give back money"
One can imagine the following sequence of events:
{verenganvaD Huch nob tlhIngan} "The Klingon gave money to the Ferengi"
{Huch neHbe' verengan} "The Ferengi didn't want the money"
{Huch nobHa' verengan} "The Ferengi gave the money back"
In the above, {nobHa'} is performed by the Ferengi. However, could we
also describe a situation like this?
{verenganvaD Huch nob tlhIngan} "The Klingon gave money to the Ferengi"
{Huch tlhapqa' neH tlhIngan} "The Klingon wanted the money back"
{Huch ?nobHa' tlhIngan} "The Klingon ungave the money, the Klingon
took his money back"
Is this second scenario a legitimate use of {nobHa'}? Why or why not?
If you didn't have the canon definition and example, would your
opinion have been different? Could {nobHa'} mean both "give back" and
?"ungive, take back", depending on the context (i.e., whether the
subject of {nobHa'} was the original giver or recipient of {nob})?
With verbs affecting the subject (e.g., adjectival verbs), it's clear
that the subject must perform the {-Ha'} action, e.g., if my targ
{lIt} the control panel, only it can {lItHa'} it. With verbs
affecting only one object, in most cases I think it's clear that
anyone can perform the {-Ha'} action, e.g., if I {jotlh} a poster from
a wall, someone else can come along and {jotlhHa'} it, although I can
also {jotlhHa'} it myself.
{nobHa'} is obviously not like {lItHa'}, but is it like {jotlh}? It
seems similar, and yet it is different in that it has an indirect
object marked with {-vaD}.
The question is, if I {nob} something, is the set of people who can {nobHa'} it:
1) only the recipient? (that the recipient can {nobHa'} the given item
is the only usage supported by canon)
2) the recipient or myself? (why shouldn't I be able to {-Ha'} an
action I performed?)
3) the recipient, myself, or anyone else? (if a third party retrieved
the given item from the recipient and returned it to me, can {nobHa'}
describe this person's action?)
I tried to come up with examples of other verbs, and I think I can
divide them into three classes based on what they affect.
With verbs like {lIt}, {'el}, {jaH}, {yong}, which affect the subject
(whether or not the verb can take an object), the subject is the only
one who can {-Ha'}. (But someone else can {-Ha'moH}. The {-moH}
effectively turns this case into the next one.)
With verbs like {jotlh}, {pol}, {QeymoH}, which affect only the one
object, anyone can {-Ha'} the action.
But with verbs like {nob}, {ngev}, {ngeH}, which affect two objects,
it's not clear if anyone other than the object marked with {-vaD} (the
indirect object, recipient, or beneficiary) can {-Ha'} the original
action.
What do y'all think?
--
De'vID
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
[email protected]
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol