[tlhIngan Hol] using {chol}

[Will Martin]

I completely agree with you, IF {chol} works like {ghoS}. It probably does, but there’s no canon to back up that presumption.

SuStel’s approach is conservative. I’m sure that his suggested grammar works. I think that your suggested grammar works as well. I think that both work, but if I had to put money on it, I’d go with SuStel, because there is no rule that a verb can use based on its meaning to make it behave grammatically like {ghoS}. Okrand (or Maltz) can arbitrarily declare a verb to work like {ghoS} or not.

SuStel’s suggestion would work for either {Sum} or {ghoS}. Your suggestion works with {ghoS}, but not {Sum}.

So, if you want to treat it like {ghoS}, I don’t think anyone would misunderstand you or give you TOO much sass in conversation or casual writing, but if you are writing something that might stick around for a while, such that you could be embarrassed by investing in an interpretation that ultimately is proven wrong, then SuStel’s approach is probably wiser.

charghwI’ vaghnerya’ngan

rInpa’ bomnIS be’’a’ pI’.




> On Jun 14, 2019, at 3:52 AM, Rhona Fenwick <qeslagh at hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> ghItlhpu' mayqel, jatlh:
> > I want to say "I come nearer to you". Which of the following is
> > the correct way to say it ? 
> > qachol
> > SoHDaq jIchol
> > SoHDaq vIchol
> > SoHDaq qachol 
> 
> I know of no canon examples of chol with overt pronominal prefixes; the only two instances I know of it in use, from TKD, would have a third-person object in any case and so they're not illuminating.
> 
> Personally, I lean towards qachol in parallel with other verbs expressing motion, like ghoS, jaH, 'el, leng, etc. (which presumably would mean SoHDaq qachol would also be acceptable - though as Okrand also says regarding pa'Daq vI'el, probably overkill). With all due respect to SuStel, his suggested parallel with Sum or Hop doesn't hold water, because these verbs are canonically adjectival and so they can't take objects in any case: HIvje' Sum yItlhap (HolQeD 7:4), Daq HopHa'Daq qa'chaj nejlI' qotar qempa'QeH je (PB, paq'raD 9:1-3), Daq SumHa'vo' wab Huj Qoylu' (PB, paq'raD 1:13). I don't think there's any justification for treating chol the same way.
> 
> QeS 'utlh
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org <mailto:tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org>
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org <http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190614/e44f4d89/attachment-0016.htm>