On 8/10/2017 7:39 PM, DloraH wrote:
On Thu, 2017-08-10 at 19:20 -0400, SuStel wrote:
On 8/10/2017 7:13 PM, DloraH wrote:
On Thu, 2017-08-10 at 12:25 -0400, SuStel wrote:
On 8/10/2017 11:52 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote: ... * *
What I'm trying to understand (and the more this thread continues, the "trying" becomes "struggling"), is why -as De'vID wrote- "the pattern is {X-vo' Y-Daq chegh} and not {Y-Daq X-vo' chegh}". I don't know anything about there being a REASON it can only work that way. What I know is what Voragh has already pointed out: we have many canonical examples of*X-vo' Y-Daq OVS* and none of *Y-Daq X-vo' OVS.* The answer to your question is "that's just the way it is." For me, a leading -Daq would be the location where the whole [-vo' -Daq chegh] is taking place.
HoD - [nuqDaq beq? yuQ ghoSta''a'?] yaS - [jISovchu'be'. yuQ ghoSlaw'] yuQ ghoS HoD. beq nej.
Meanwhile... DujDaq puchpa'vo' vutpa'Daq chegh beq. I don't think you'd even need to appeal to three syntactic nouns to do that:*DujDaq puchpa'vo' chegh*/on the ship, he returns from the bathroom./ There's probably some scoping rules baked into our language-using brains that does this. No way to tell if Klingons do the same. But you left out the part about returning "to the galley".
I put the DujDaq on there to emphasis that the crewman is still on the ship; as opposed to returning from a toilet to a galley, in some building down on the planet.
I left it out for exactly the reason I stated: you don't need it to see what the role of *X-Daq Y-vo'**V* seems to be when X is of a greater scope than Y. I wasn't continuing to describe your scenario. You're talking about the crew of a ship. First you talk about the landing party. Then you say *DujDaq puchpa'vo' chegh HoD*/on the ship, the captain returns from the bathroom./ This is unlikely to be interpreted as /the captain returns to the ship from the bathroom./ Thanks to the apparent scoping of syntactic nouns, you need to see *X-vo' Y-Daq* to interpret them in the same scope, /from X to Y./ In the other order, *Y-Daq X-vo',* it FEELS like Y has a different precedence than X. /On/at/in Y, something happens from X./ Again, we have no evidence of this; it's just some implicit scoping that we have trouble ignoring. It's probably evidence of English bias. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name