jIH:
yaSvaD taj vIqem
I give the knife to the officer by bringing it to him
SuStel:
You might give the knife to the officer, but you don't say so in this sentence.
This sentence just says you bring the knife to the officer. Whether the officer
picks it up after you bring it is another sentence.
Oh yes, you're right; I wrote the translation this way to
differentiate between the "I bring the knife to the officer" meaning
of the {yaSDaq taj vIqem}, which would mean "I bring the knife to the
officer" (with the officer being meant as the location where the knife
is brought).
jIH:
yaSvaD taj vIngeH
I give the knife to the officer by sending it to him
So when giving something to someone we use the
{-vaD} regardless whether we bring it to him, or send it to him.
SuStel:
No. We use -vaD when we want to specify the recipient or beneficiary
of the verb. When you're specifying a recipient, this role is called the indirect object.
Indeed, I made again the mistake of choosing this translation in order
to differentiate between the "I send the knife to the officer" meaning
of the {yaSDaq taj vIngeH} which would mean "I send the knife to the
officer" (with the officer being meant as the location where the knife
is sent).
This has always been a source of confusion for me; the fact that in
english we use the word "to" to translate both the {-Daq} and the
{-vaD}.
~ Dana'an
taH pagh taHbe'
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.orghttp://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org