[tlhIngan Hol] Does Da necessarily require an object ?

[SuStel]

On 3/6/2019 9:20 AM, Jeffrey Clark wrote:
> The gloss for {Da} is “behave as” and “act in the manner of”. This is not the same as “behave”, as the gloss directly denotes the presence of an object.
>
> {nuq vIDanIS} would seem to be more grammatically correct than any formulation leading to {jIDanIS}.
>
> If we use a literal translation with the gloss: “How do I need to behave as” is technically understandable, but feels awkward and would get red ink from any writing teacher (if we don’t leave “as” dangling we get “I need to behave as how”, which is kinda muddled). Rather “I need to behave as what” is absolutely grammatically acceptable (though most people would say “what do I need to behave as”).

Don't rely too much on determining Klingon grammar from the published 
English translations. As you point out, a smooth English translation 
probably rearranges the words anyway. I spent years warning people not 
to give *qIm* an object because the published translation was /pay 
attention,/ not /pay attention to,/ and that restriction was not borne 
out in later canon.

I could see *jIDa* meaning something like /I put on an act/ or /I behave 
in some affected way./ I can't say whether it does or doesn't mean this, 
but I see no reason it couldn't mean that.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190306/ead50b07/attachment-0015.htm>