[tlhIngan Hol] Clarification on SIch

[Felix Malmenbeck]

>> Here are two more things about SIch I'd like clarified.
>> Can it be used with the body part or implement as its object? ?chabHom bal qoD ghopwIj vISIch I reach my hand into the cookie jar.
>> Or can the body part or implement be the subject? ?chabHom bal qoD SIch ghopwIj My hand reaches into the cookie jar.
> SIch seems to take the thing reached for as its object, so the first one is probably not right. The subject seems to be the entity that causes
> some extension of itself to move toward the thing reached for, so using a body part or implement as the subject is questionable. I'd stick
> to the known interpretation unless more information were > forthcoming. paq vISIch; tlhapmeH jan vIlo' I use the grabber to reach for and
> take the book.

I'd like to second this sentiment. English has quite a lot of verbs where the role of the subject changes depending on whether or not the verb has a direct object; I believe they're called "alternating ambitransitive verbs", but I'm not sure if that covers all of them.

Klingon does not appear to have this same tendency:

English: I move. / I move the chair.
Klingon: jIvIH. / quS vIvIHmoH.

English: The water froze. / I froze the water:
Klingon: taDchoH bIQ. / bIQ vItaDmoH.

English: The window closed. / I closed the window.
Klingon: SoQchoHpu' Qorwagh. / Qorwagh vISoQmoHta'.

English: I bend over and touch my toes. / I bend steel rods.
Klingon: yaDDu'wIj vIHotmeH jISIH'egh. / ghav 'uSqan tutmey vISIH.

...and while I think most of us interpret HuS in the intransitive sense of the word "hang", we can't quite rule out the transitive meaning without further evidence.

We have seen some Klingon words that show a similar type of ambitransitive alternation (ghom, choH, mev), and I'm sure others exist, but from an in-universe perspective, there's not much reason to infer that a Klingon verb is an alternating ambitransitive based on whether or not its English gloss is.

(From an out-of-universe perspective, there is some reason to expect this, because all of our source material is in English and this increases the risk that both interpretations of a verb will be used.)

//loghaD

________________________________


From: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol-bounces at lists.kli.org> on behalf of SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name>
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2019 16:49
To: tlhingan-hol at lists.kli.org
Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Clarification on SIch

On 4/10/2019 10:37 AM, Ed Bailey wrote:
Back to SIch, it seems clear it differs from paw in that only a body part or implement is used to arrive at its object. I think another difference is what the progressive aspect means. Compare reaching for a book and a train going to a city or a station. As soon as someone begins to reach for a book, regardless of his ultimate success, I'd say he SIchtaH or SIchlI'. But I would only say pawtaH of a train that is entering the city or pulling into the station.


The continuous and progressive aspects are used when a sentence is meant to express continuousness or progressiveness. paq vISIch: I stretch my hand to the book. I'm not saying anything about how it is done, just that it is what I do. paq vISIchtaH I am in the middle of the ongoing act of stretching my hand to the book. paq vISIchlI' I am in the middle of the ongoing act of stretching my hand to the book, and it'll be over when my hand has grasped the book. Any of the three sentences could be used to describe the same circumstance; what matters is how I want to describe it happening.


Here are two more things about SIch I'd like clarified.
Can it be used with the body part or implement as its object? ?chabHom bal qoD ghopwIj vISIch I reach my hand into the cookie jar.
Or can the body part or implement be the subject? ?chabHom bal qoD SIch ghopwIj My hand reaches into the cookie jar.

SIch seems to take the thing reached for as its object, so the first one is probably not right. The subject seems to be the entity that causes some extension of itself to move toward the thing reached for, so using a body part or implement as the subject is questionable. I'd stick to the known interpretation unless more information were forthcoming. paq vISIch; tlhapmeH jan vIlo' I use the grabber to reach for and take the book.

--
SuStel
http://trimboli.name
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190410/ce49c932/attachment-0002.htm>