You’ve hit the biggest problem with the glosses in the word list. We are left to watch canon and otherwise make assumptions about what objects are appropriate for any given verb. Usually it matches English, but not always. Many people have read the gloss for {vIH} and assumed that it takes an object, when we learned years after TKD was published that if A moves B, the verb is {vIHmoH}.

So, if we can’t always tell whether a verb takes an object at all, how are we supposed to know which objects are appropriate for each verb? We usually don’t. We guess.

charghwI’ vaghnerya’ngan

rInpa’ bomnIS be’’a’ pI’.

On Aug 4, 2020, at 8:05 AM, mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:

All these years I took for granted, that the object of vor can be
either the patient or the disease.

But only recently I realized, that in the Ca'Non example of {Hoch vor
Dargh wIb} the translation is given as "sour tea cures everything",
and not as "sour tea cures everyone" (with the "everyone" referring to
patients).

So one *could* wonder whether we could indeed use the {vor} to say
things like {nuv rop vorta' Qel} "the doctor cured the patient".

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