Another idea, unrelated to the syntactic workings of {nargh}: maybe they're in fact not 2 distinct homophonic verbs, but one verb with 2 quite different translations in English. Escaping and appearing might just be different viewpoints of the same action, just like "come" and "go" are both {ghoS} or {jaH} and context (often {-vo'} decides how to interpret it. Klingon isn't the only language which does that. One of the languages of Burma that I am working on (Jinghpaw, pronounced exactly like {jIngpo'} in Klingon by the way!) also only has one word "sa" to mean both 'come' and 'go'. So perhaps {nargh} describes the concept of suddenly changing its state of presence. One can, sort of, appear to a place, or away from a place. Or a thing might suddenly escape from nowhere into sight, and then suddenly escape out of your sight again. - André 2016-11-21 21:02 GMT+01:00 SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name>:
On 11/21/2016 1:34 PM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
SuStel:
You can either say ghe''orvo' jInarghpu' I escaped> from Grethor or ghe''or vInarghpu' I escaped Grethor.
hmm.. now I started to wonder.. walk with me..
bIQ'a' HeHDaq jIjaH the "going" takes place at the shore
bIQ'a' HeH vIjaH I am going to the shore
bIQ'a' HeHDaq vIjaH I am going to the shore (same as above, with the {-Daq} being unnecessary but not wrong)
if the above are correct, and the {nargh} "to escape" is to be treated as a verb of movement, then why not: {ghe''orvo' vInarghpu'} ?
I don't think *nargh* is a verb of movement. But even if it were, notice the difference between *-Daq* and *-vo'*:
*-Daq* has two senses: *going** to* a place or *being** at* a place. *-vo'* has only one sense: *going from* a place. It doesn't seem to have a corresponding meaning of *being away from* a place.
When you say *vaS'a'Daq jIjaH,* the special rules of verbs of motion mean you're forced to pick just one of the usual *-Daq* meanings: *being at* a place. This makes it mean something like, *at the Great Hall, I go.* But *jaH* can also take an object that represents the destination. *vaS'a' vIjaH* *I go to the Great Hall.* The* to* meaning is inherent to the verb. So adding *-Daq* to that noun doesn't change the inherent *to* of the verb, forcing you into the meaning of *to *a place.
The reason you can add *-Daq* to the object of such words, even though that doesn't seem to happen with other words, is that the *to* is already built in. You're just making explicit what comes inherently with the verb.
But *-vo'* does not seem to be inherent in verbs of motion, at least not as Okrand presented them. When he was describing the verb *leng,* he gave us *yuQ vIlegh* and *yuQDaq vIlegh* *I travel to the planet,** yuQvo' jIleng** I roam away from the planet,* and *yuQDaq jIleng** I roam around/about the planet.* He conspicuously doesn't give us **yuQvo' vIleng.* His example *yuQvo' jIleng* apparently doesn't mean *I roam in a place away from the planet.*
-- SuStelhttp://trimboli.name
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org