Is anything known about whether {nay} and {Saw} are transitive and/or intransitive, or how they are used? Specifically, are they "marry" in the sense of "get married" (intransitive) or "get married to [person]" (transitive)? Given http://www.qephom.de/e/message_from_maltz_170713.html and its endorsement of the grammaticality of {naychuq} and {Sawchuq} and its example of {B tlhogh A}, I assume that {nay} and {Saw} work similarly and that one can say {qeylIS nay luqara'} and {luqara' Saw qeylIS}. But presumably also {wa' Hogh pIq jISaw} "I'm going to get married next week", without an object. And I think I read something about {A B je tlhoghmoH C} for "C (officiant) marries (performs the marriage of) A and B; C causes A and B to be a married couple", though I can't find it in that message from Maltz. ... ah, it's from page "Other 3" of https://www.kli.org/activities/qepmey/qepa-chamah-losdich/qepa-chamah-losdic... . Does all that sound about right? Thanks! Cheers, Philip -- Philip Newton <philip.newton@gmail.com>
On 8/4/2017 10:42 AM, Philip Newton wrote:
Is anything known about whether {nay} and {Saw} are transitive and/or intransitive, or how they are used?
Specifically, are they "marry" in the sense of "get married" (intransitive) or "get married to [person]" (transitive)?
Givenhttp://www.qephom.de/e/message_from_maltz_170713.html and its endorsement of the grammaticality of {naychuq} and {Sawchuq} and its example of {B tlhogh A}, I assume that {nay} and {Saw} work similarly and that one can say {qeylIS nay luqara'} and {luqara' Saw qeylIS}.
Any Klingon verb that can take an object may leave that object off to mean either the action is done in general or to an unspecified object. So *nay luqara'* means /Lukara marries (in general, or someone unspecified)./ I didn't doubt before that those words took objects; allowing *-chuq* on them cliches it for me. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
SuStel:
allowing -chuq on them cliches it for me.
What does "cliches it for me" mean ? qunnoq On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 6:02 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
On 8/4/2017 10:42 AM, Philip Newton wrote:
Is anything known about whether {nay} and {Saw} are transitive and/or intransitive, or how they are used?
Specifically, are they "marry" in the sense of "get married" (intransitive) or "get married to [person]" (transitive)?
Given http://www.qephom.de/e/message_from_maltz_170713.html and its endorsement of the grammaticality of {naychuq} and {Sawchuq} and its example of {B tlhogh A}, I assume that {nay} and {Saw} work similarly and that one can say {qeylIS nay luqara'} and {luqara' Saw qeylIS}.
Any Klingon verb that can take an object may leave that object off to mean either the action is done in general or to an unspecified object. So nay luqara' means Lukara marries (in general, or someone unspecified).
I didn't doubt before that those words took objects; allowing -chuq on them cliches it for me.
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On 8/4/2017 11:10 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
SuStel:
allowing -chuq on them cliches it for me. What does "cliches it for me" mean ?
Sorry, I mistyped /clinches./ It makes me certain; I have no doubt at all. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
On 4 August 2017 at 17:10, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
SuStel:
allowing -chuq on them cliches it for me.
What does "cliches it for me" mean ?
No doubt a typo for "clinches it for me". To clinch: to settle (a matter) decisively. Cheers, Philip -- Philip Newton <philip.newton@gmail.com>
participants (3)
-
mayqel qunenoS -
Philip Newton -
SuStel