[tlhIngan Hol] Using object prefix with {-vo'}

[SuStel]

On 8/9/2017 10:18 AM, Aurélie Demonchaux wrote:
>
>     *juHDaq vIjaH* is considered redundant because the object of
>     *jaH* inherently includes a locative sense. Anything you *jaH* is
>     something you're *jaH*-ing /to./
>
>     There is no inherent "away from" sense to *jaH,* so *juHvo'
>     vIjaH* is probably an awkward phrase, if not downright disallowed.
>
>
> On the other hand, the Klingon Dictionary uses the below examples:
>
> {pa'Daq yIjaH} <Go to the room.> (section 3.3.5., p27)
> {pa'vo' yIjaH} <Leave the room!> (section 3.3.5., p28)
> {jolpa'Daq yIjaH} <Go to the transport room!> (section 7.1, p73)
>
> So it seems ok and cannon to use -Daq and -vo' suffixes along with <jaH>.

I didn't say it wasn't. Specifically, I said that a *-vo'* noun /as the 
object of/ *jaH* might not work (and only might). I didn't say anything 
about a *-vo'* noun that isn't the object of *jaH.* In the TKD example 
above, you can't tell whether *pa'vo' yIjaH* has *pa'vo'* as the object 
of *jaH* or as a syntactic noun at the beginning.

Also, Okrand has revised his use of *-Daq* a little since TKD came out. 
For instance, in PK (before the /HolQeD /article where he talks about 
verbs of motion) he says *naDevvo' vaS'a'Daq majaHlaH'a'*/can we get to 
the Great Hall from here?/ According to the /HolQeD/ interview, that 
should mean /can we, in the Great Hall, go from here?/

When Okrand revises the rules, I see that as invoking the statement in 
TKD's introduction that warns that the grammar is only a poorly 
understood sketch.

So the validity of those examples in TKD to verify this point must be 
considered suspect.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20170809/e890719f/attachment-0016.htm>