On 8/3/2023 7:40 AM, luis.chaparro--- via tlhIngan-Hol wrote:
{vengDaq taw vIghoS} means “I’m traveling along a road in the city.” It does not mean “I’m traveling along a road toward the city.” “Toward the city” is a direction, not a location. If you want to indicate that you are going toward the city, you are using the wrong verb. {taw vIghoS. veng vIjaH}. I'm sorry but I don't think I'm getting the point here. I thought *-Daq* expresses a location or a destination depending on context. De'vID and SuStel agreed, if I've understood them well, that the sentence*vengDaq taw vIghoS* can be translated*I go along the road in the city* (*vengDaq* expressing a location where something happens) or*I go along the road toward the city* (*vengDaq* expressing a destination where I'm moving to). SuStel also interpreted*ghe'tor lojmIt'a'Daq 'Iw bIQtIq ghoS* as*He goes along the River of Blood toward the great gates of Gre'thor*.
Am I missing something?
I think charghwI' is being unnecessarily restrictive on the meaning of a non-object noun with *-Daq* before the verb *ghoS.* He's assuming it /never/ means a destination, only the place where the going happens. I argue that this is the case of *jaH,* where the object of the verb is the destination, so any other locative non-object noun in the sentence cannot also be the destination, but it is not the case with *ghoS,* where the object is the course followed, not necessarily the destination, so the role of destination remains open to non-object *-Daq* nouns. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name