On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 11:07 AM Iikka Hauhio <fergusq@protonmail.com> wrote:
When *ghoS* is used to mean "go away from", it has *-vo'*:
*chaH neH wovmoHlu'be'*
*chaH 'emvo' ghoS* *SuvwI'pu' mangghom **yoH*
*The sun shone not on them only,*
*Behind them came*
*An army of brave warriors.*
(paq'batlh)
I don't see a "go away from" meaning there. I see a "go/proceed" and I see
a context-setting "from behind them", but they don't combine for me the way you seem to be treating it. My interpretation of this text is that *ghoS *has its typical meaning of "move along a path", with an implied destination here of *chaH*. Notice the English version of the passage uses the word "came", not "went away from". The phrase *chaH 'emvo'* does indicate the direction from which the army approached, but they *came* from there. They didn't *go away from* there. (Okay, perhaps they literally did, but that's not the point of the sentence.)
Based on the evidence we have I don't think we can say that a nominative object could have an ablative meaning. I think the definition just means that in some contexts (ie. when *-vo'* is used), the verb can be translated with "go away from".
We certainly cannot conclude from what we know that an object with *-vo'* *must* be allowed by Klingon grammar. But if you're going to translate *X-vo' ghoS* as *go away from X* with the "from" embedded in the verb instead of being part of the location, you're already treating *X* as the verb's object even as it bears the *-vo'* suffix*.* -- ghunchu'wI'