[tlhIngan Hol] Is {Sal} a verb of movement ?

[SuStel]

On 2/12/2019 11:37 AM, Will Martin wrote:
>
> Anyway, I do believe you are right and I had misremembered {bIQtIqDaq 
> vIghoS}. Thanks for pointing that out. So, depending on the prefix, 
> the {-Daq} is optional. I was wrong about that. I personally think 
> that {bIQtIq vIghoS} is stylistically preferable to {bIQtIqDaq 
> vIghoS}, since it is less ambiguous, given that there could be some 
> implied course that doesn’t involve the river if you include {-Daq}, 
> but that’s just a personal opinion carrying no more weight than anyone 
> else’s opinion.

It's not exactly optional. There is a difference: *bIQtIqDaq vIghoS* is 
"somewhat redundant, but not out-and-out wrong."

So your choices are to not use the *-Daq* or to use the *-Daq* and be 
somewhat redundant.

And it's not really dependent on the prefix. It's just that the prefix 
makes it clear whether you're talking about an object or a noun that 
comes before the object-verb-subject structure. In TKD the difference is 
shown without changing any prefix: *Duj ghoStaH*/It is approaching the 
ship/ versus *DujDaq ghoStaH*/It is approaching toward the ship./ Using 
an example without an illustrative prefix is just harder to follow.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190212/e38593d7/attachment-0016.htm>