On 2/12/2019 11:37 AM, Will Martin wrote:
Anyway, I do believe you are right and I had misremembered {bIQtIqDaq vIghoS}. Thanks for pointing that out. So, depending on the prefix, the {-Daq} is optional. I was wrong about that. I personally think that {bIQtIq vIghoS} is stylistically preferable to {bIQtIqDaq vIghoS}, since it is less ambiguous, given that there could be some implied course that doesn’t involve the river if you include {-Daq}, but that’s just a personal opinion carrying no more weight than anyone else’s opinion.
It's not exactly optional. There is a difference: *bIQtIqDaq vIghoS* is "somewhat redundant, but not out-and-out wrong." So your choices are to not use the *-Daq* or to use the *-Daq* and be somewhat redundant. And it's not really dependent on the prefix. It's just that the prefix makes it clear whether you're talking about an object or a noun that comes before the object-verb-subject structure. In TKD the difference is shown without changing any prefix: *Duj ghoStaH*/It is approaching the ship/ versus *DujDaq ghoStaH*/It is approaching toward the ship./ Using an example without an illustrative prefix is just harder to follow. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name