On 8/9/2017 10:18 AM, Aurélie Demonchaux wrote:

juHDaq vIjaH is considered redundant because the object of jaH inherently includes a locative sense. Anything you jaH is something you're jaH-ing to.

There is no inherent "away from" sense to jaH, so juHvo' vIjaH is probably an awkward phrase, if not downright disallowed.

On the other hand, the Klingon Dictionary uses the below examples:

{pa'Daq yIjaH} <Go to the room.> (section 3.3.5., p27)

{pa'vo' yIjaH} <Leave the room!> (section 3.3.5., p28)

{jolpa'Daq yIjaH} <Go to the transport room!> (section 7.1, p73)

So it seems ok and cannon to use -Daq and -vo' suffixes along with <jaH>.

I didn't say it wasn't. Specifically, I said that a -vo' noun as the object of jaH might not work (and only might). I didn't say anything about a -vo' noun that isn't the object of jaH. In the TKD example above, you can't tell whether pa'vo' yIjaH has pa'vo' as the object of jaH or as a syntactic noun at the beginning.

Also, Okrand has revised his use of -Daq a little since TKD came out. For instance, in PK (before the HolQeD article where he talks about verbs of motion) he says naDevvo' vaS'a'Daq majaHlaH'a' can we get to the Great Hall from here? According to the HolQeD interview, that should mean can we, in the Great Hall, go from here?

When Okrand revises the rules, I see that as invoking the statement in TKD's introduction that warns that the grammar is only a poorly understood sketch.

So the validity of those examples in TKD to verify this point must be considered suspect.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name

_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org