when to {-vaD} and when to {-Daq}
If we want to say "I gave the knife to the officer", we say {yaSvaD taj vInob}. Can someone please explain, why it would be wrong to say {yaSDaq taj vInob} ? ~ bara'qa'
On 12/5/2019 9:28 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
If we want to say "I gave the knife to the officer", we say {yaSvaD taj vInob}.
Can someone please explain, why it would be wrong to say {yaSDaq taj vInob} ?
You use *-Daq* when you're specifying a location and *-vaD* when you're specifying a beneficiary or recipient. *yaSDaq taj vInob* means /I give the knife (to someone unspecified) at the location of the officer./ -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
Am 05.12.2019 um 15:28 schrieb mayqel qunen'oS:
If we want to say "I gave the knife to the officer", we say {yaSvaD taj vInob}.
Can someone please explain, why it would be wrong to say {yaSDaq taj vInob} ?
~ bara'qa'
First I thought this should be clear, but with furrther thinking, I understnad your question. Basically, -Daq is to be used as a locative. When you give something to someone, in English you use the same word ("A to B"), but neither of you changes their location. Still you may say that the knives moves from A to B, but then you should remember that -Daq is used in that sense only with verbs of motion (walk, go, travel). Using -Daq in the process of giving something, it somehow sounds like "I gave the knife into the direction of the officer" which may be understood, but sounds very awkward. -vaD is defined as marking the benificient of the action, so "I gave it to him" literally means in Klingon "I gave it and he was the receiving person." No movement implied, so no -Daq used. I hope my short wording is okay for you. I'm sure others might explain that a lot more detailed and with tons of special words, but this is the point. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.de http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Type5NounSuffixes
On 12/5/2019 9:39 AM, Lieven L. Litaer wrote:
Am 05.12.2019 um 15:28 schrieb mayqel qunen'oS:
If we want to say "I gave the knife to the officer", we say {yaSvaD taj vInob}.
Can someone please explain, why it would be wrong to say {yaSDaq taj vInob} ?
~ bara'qa'
First I thought this should be clear, but with furrther thinking, I understnad your question.
English, and I'm sure some other languages, use the same preposition /(to)/ to indicate locatives and recipients. This is the source of the confusion.
Basically, -Daq is to be used as a locative. When you give something to someone, in English you use the same word ("A to B"), but neither of you changes their location. Still you may say that the knives moves from A to B, but then you should remember that -Daq is used in that sense only with verbs of motion (walk, go, travel).
This is misleading. For one thing, *yIt* is not a "verb of motion" in the sense of it being a verb with an inherently locative meaning the way *jaH* and *leng* are. You cannot say *vaS'a' vIyIt* for /I walk to the Great Hall./ When you use one of these non-locative verbs, any locative you attach to it can mean the action happens in or near that location, but it can also mean that the locative is the destination of the action. *vaS'a' jIyIt*/I walk in/at/on/by/to the Great Hall./ In verbs with an inherently locative sense, the /in/at/by/on/ meaning is separated from the /to/ meaning. If a noun is the object of one of these verbs, it has a /to/ sense. If it's put in front of the object, it has the other senses. *vaS'a'Daq vIjaH* means my destination is the Great Hall (and the *-Daq* is considered redundant). *vaS'a'Daq jIjaH* means I'm in, near, or on the Great Hall and I'm going somewhere inside it. *vaS'a'Daq Qang pa' vIjaH*/I go to the chancellor's room in the Great Hall./
Using -Daq in the process of giving something, it somehow sounds like "I gave the knife into the direction of the officer" which may be understood, but sounds very awkward.
It could also mean that while I'm in the location of the officer, I give the knife to someone not specified. Not at all the intended meaning.
-vaD is defined as marking the benificient of the action, so "I gave it to him" literally means in Klingon "I gave it and he was the receiving person." No movement implied, so no -Daq used.
No location implied at all, movement or otherwise. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
ok, thank you SuStel and lieven, I understand so far. But there's still something I wonder.. If I want to say "I bring the knife to the officer", and "I send the knife to the officer", then would the following be correct ? yaSvaD taj vIqem I bring the knife to the officer yaSvaD taj vIngeH I send the knife to the officer And if I want to say "I send the knife from earth to kronos", then would the following be correct ? tera'vo' Qo'noSvaD taj vIngeH I send the knife from earth to kronos - bara'qa'
On 12/5/2019 10:01 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
ok, thank you SuStel and lieven, I understand so far.
But there's still something I wonder..
If I want to say "I bring the knife to the officer", and "I send the knife to the officer", then would the following be correct ?
yaSvaD taj vIqem I bring the knife to the officer
yaSvaD taj vIngeH I send the knife to the officer
And if I want to say "I send the knife from earth to kronos", then would the following be correct ?
tera'vo' Qo'noSvaD taj vIngeH I send the knife from earth to kronos
Decide whether you're talking about the location of the knife or who has the knife. Did you give the knife to the people of Kronos to receive? Or did you just make the knife change locations? -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
SuStel:
When you use one of these non-locative verbs, any locative you attach to it can mean the action happens in or near that location, but it can also mean that the locative is the destination of the action. vaS'a' jIyIt I walk in/at/on/by/to the Great Hall.
Did you intend to write {vaS'a'Daq jIyIt} ? jIH:
tera'vo' Qo'noSvaD taj vIngeH I send the knife from earth to kronos SuStel: Decide whether you're talking about the location of the knife or who has the knife. Did you give the knife to the people of Kronos to receive? Or did you just make the knife change locations?
In the above example, the intended meaning was that the knife changes locations. So, I guess that in that case, I should have written {tera'vo' Qo'noSDaq taj vIngeH} ? ~ gha'cher qIj
On 12/5/2019 10:16 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
SuStel:
When you use one of these non-locative verbs, any locative you attach to it can mean the action happens in or near that location, but it can also mean that the locative is the destination of the action. vaS'a' jIyIt I walk in/at/on/by/to the Great Hall.
Did you intend to write {vaS'a'Daq jIyIt} ?
Yes.
jIH:
tera'vo' Qo'noSvaD taj vIngeH I send the knife from earth to kronos SuStel: Decide whether you're talking about the location of the knife or who has the knife. Did you give the knife to the people of Kronos to receive? Or did you just make the knife change locations?
In the above example, the intended meaning was that the knife changes locations.
So, I guess that in that case, I should have written {tera'vo' Qo'noSDaq taj vIngeH} ?
Yes. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
tera'vo' Qo'noSvaD taj vIngeH I send the knife from earth to kronos
{tera'vo' Qo'noSvaD taj vIngeH} "from Earth for (the benefit of) Kronos" {tera'vo' Qo'noSDaq taj vIngeH} "from Earth to(wards) Kronos" See: naDevvo' vaS'a'Daq majaHlaH'a' Can we get to the Great Hall from here? PK juHqo' Qo'noSvo' loghDaq lengtaHvIS tlhInganpu' During the (aggressive) expansion of the Klingon people from their homeworld of Kronos into space... SP1 'Iw bIQtIqvo' toS SuvwI' yoH puH QaDDaq paw The fearless warrior climbs out of the blood onto dry land. PB betleHvo' qotar [sic!] mInDu' mIghDaq boch 'otlh Light reflects off the bat'leth into Fek'lhr's evil eyes. PB -- Voragh -----------------------------------Original Message---------------------------------------- On 12/5/2019 10:01 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
If I want to say "I bring the knife to the officer", and "I send the knife to the officer", then would the following be correct ?
yaSvaD taj vIqem I bring the knife to the officer
yaSvaD taj vIngeH I send the knife to the officer
And if I want to say "I send the knife from earth to kronos", then would the following be correct ?
tera'vo' Qo'noSvaD taj vIngeH I send the knife from earth to kronos
Decide whether you're talking about the location of the knife or who has the knife. Did you give the knife to the people of Kronos to receive? Or did you just make the knife change locations? -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
There's something which I can't stop wondering, when {-vaD} is being used this way.. Lets take the sentence {tera'vo' Qo'noSvaD taj vIngeH}, and lets assume that by {Qo'noS} I mean the "people of kronos". When we read it as "from earth (for the benefit of) the people of kronos", then can't it mean too something like: "I send it from earth, to someone unspecified, but for the benefit of the people of kronos" ? Why do the people of kronos *have* to be the recipient ? Can't I be sending the knife, lets say to the alien ambassador, of the species which threatens to invade kronos, so that he will cancel their imminent invasion ? ~ changan qIj
On 12/5/2019 10:47 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
Lets take the sentence {tera'vo' Qo'noSvaD taj vIngeH}, and lets assume that by {Qo'noS} I mean the "people of kronos".
When we read it as "from earth (for the benefit of) the people of kronos", then can't it mean too something like:
"I send it from earth, to someone unspecified, but for the benefit of the people of kronos" ?
Why do the people of kronos *have* to be the recipient ?
What you're asking is whether the beneficiary meaning of *-vaD* can be separated from the indirect object meaning of *-vaD.* The answer is not by grammar. /The Klingon Dictionary/ describes indirect objects as a subset of beneficiaries. So you have to rely on context to tell you which one is meant, if the difference is important. SITUATION ONE: An ancient Klingon knife is found in a deceased collector's collection on Earth. The estate donates the knife to Earth's government, and Earth decides to give it back to the people of Kronos as a gesture of goodwill. *tera'vo' Qo'noSvaD taj vIngeH*/I send the knife from Earth to be received by Kronos./ SITUATION TWO: Terrorists have planted a bizarre bomb under the surface of Kronos which will explode if a certain knife is not removed from the surface of Earth. They don't care where the knife ends up; they just don't want it on Earth. I am on Earth and find myself in possession of the knife. *tera'vo' Qo'noSvaD taj vIngeH* /I send the knife from Earth to benefit Kronos./ -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
I believe that your confusion is rooted in your desire to come up with a word replacement method for translating between English and Klingon. You have the English word “to” and you are trying to figure out whether you should replace it with the suffix {-vaD} or {-Daq}. Unfortunately, that’s not how translation works. Consider that in American Sign Language, I have a phone app that shows videos of signs for words. If I look up “lend” I see a video of a person with their hands in the position (both hands have the letter finger spelled letter “p” with the dominant hand stacked on top of the non-dominant hand) of a sign moving both hands outward, away from the person making the sign. If I look up “borrow”, I see the person with hands in exactly the same shape and relative position, except they are moving their hands toward themselves. You might think that means that each of these two words has a direction, to or from the speaker to differentiate between the signs. You’d be clueless. In truth, ASL has one sign for both of these verbs, and you do it in the direction from the lender to the borrower. If I’m saying person A to my left lends something to person B to my right, I start out with my hands pointing toward my left and end up with my hands to my right. Also, if I say, “I lend you a book,” the sentence is identical to the sentence “You borrow a book from me.” The one ASL sentence simultaneously states both of these sentences in English. English merely implies one when it states the other, but in ASL, it’s explicitly stating both, because ASL is very visual, and it’s visually clear that lend/borrow has a starting point and an ending point for the thing being loaned/borrowed, and the sign symbolizes what happens to the object being borrowed/loaned. So, in Klingon {-Daq} is either giving you the location where the action of the verb happens, or it gives you the direction toward which the action progresses. If there is no motion, it’s the location of the action. If there is motion, then maybe the motion is contained within the area one considers to be {-Daq} or maybe the action moves toward {-Daq}. Either could be true. In Klingon {-vaD} is the beneficiary of the action. The term “beneficiary” here is the linguistic meaning of the word, not the general population use of the word. Maybe it means the entity that benefits from the gift. Maybe it’s the simple indirect object of the verb. Again, context has to help you out here. So, if you want to translate the English word “to”, you have to consider what it MEANS in your specific English sentence. You can’t just tie it to a single noun suffix in any kind of word replacement scheme of translation. This is why computers stink at translation. Computers don’t understand the meaning of our words. They just do remarkable pattern recognition of characters. That’s not enough to make translations work very well. charghwI’ vaghnerya’ngan rInpa’ bomnIS be’’a’ pI’.
On Dec 5, 2019, at 10:47 AM, mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
There's something which I can't stop wondering, when {-vaD} is being used this way..
Lets take the sentence {tera'vo' Qo'noSvaD taj vIngeH}, and lets assume that by {Qo'noS} I mean the "people of kronos".
When we read it as "from earth (for the benefit of) the people of kronos", then can't it mean too something like:
"I send it from earth, to someone unspecified, but for the benefit of the people of kronos" ?
Why do the people of kronos *have* to be the recipient ?
Can't I be sending the knife, lets say to the alien ambassador, of the species which threatens to invade kronos, so that he will cancel their imminent invasion ?
~ changan qIj _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
SuStel:
SITUATION ONE: An ancient Klingon knife is found in a deceased collector's collection on Earth. The estate donates the knife to Earth's government, and Earth decides to give it back to the people of Kronos as a gesture of goodwill. tera'vo' Qo'noSvaD taj vIngeH I send the knife from Earth to be received by Kronos.
Did you mean to write {tera'vo' Qo'noSDaq taj vIngeH} ? ~ mayqel qunen'oS
On 12/21/2019 9:03 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
SuStel:
SITUATION ONE: An ancient Klingon knife is found in a deceased collector's collection on Earth. The estate donates the knife to Earth's government, and Earth decides to give it back to the people of Kronos as a gesture of goodwill. tera'vo' Qo'noSvaD taj vIngeH I send the knife from Earth to be received by Kronos. Did you mean to write {tera'vo' Qo'noSDaq taj vIngeH} ?
No, I didn't. Go back and reread my previous message. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
participants (5)
-
Lieven L. Litaer -
mayqel qunen'oS -
Steven Boozer -
SuStel -
Will Martin