Suppose I write: {Qo'noSDaq nujaHmoH chaH}. This means "they cause us to be going on kronos", i.e. the "going" takes place on kronos. But if I write: {maHvaD Qo'noS lujaHmoH}, then this means "they cause us to go to kronos", i.e. "the destination of our going is kronos". Are the above correct ? ~ channgan qIj
On 10/19/2018 3:54 PM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
Suppose I write: {Qo'noSDaq nujaHmoH chaH}. This means "they cause us to be going on kronos", i.e. the "going" takes place on kronos.
But if I write: {maHvaD Qo'noS lujaHmoH}, then this means "they cause us to go to kronos", i.e. "the destination of our going is kronos".
Are the above correct ?
Yes. You could also say the latter as *Qo'noS nujaHmoH* via the prefix trick. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
jIH:
Qo'noSDaq nujaHmoH chaH maHvaD Qo'noS lujaHmoH SuStel: Yes. You could also say the latter as *Qo'noS nujaHmoH* via the prefix trick.
hmm.. This confuses me. I thought that by saying {Qo'noS nujaHmoH}, the meaning would be that "the going takes place on Kronos', instead of "we are being caused to go to Kronos". ~ channgan
On 10/20/2018 12:46 PM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
jIH:
Qo'noSDaq nujaHmoH chaH maHvaD Qo'noS lujaHmoH SuStel: Yes. You could also say the latter as *Qo'noS nujaHmoH* via the prefix trick.
hmm.. This confuses me. I thought that by saying {Qo'noS nujaHmoH}, the meaning would be that "the going takes place on Kronos', instead of "we are being caused to go to Kronos".
The direct object of the word *jaH* is inherently locative. Any direct object you give to it will be interpreted in a locative sense. The direct object of *jaH* is the destination the subject is going to. *Qo'noS lujaH* /They go to Kronos./ Any other locatives that may be added in front of *jaH* do not necessarily imply the destination of the going, since locatives in Klingon can mean /on, in, at, /or even /by./ It's not impossible to interpret a non-object locative in front of *jaH* as the destination, but it generally won't be interpreted that way, since that's what the object is for. *DujDaq jaH chaH*/They go on the ship. /*DujDaq Qo'noS lujaH*/They go to Kronos on the ship./ It's all about whether the locative is the direct object or not. If it is, it's the destination. If it isn't, it's not the destination. // -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
SuStel:
It's all about whether the locative is the direct object or not. If it is, it's the destination. If it isn't, it's not the destination.
I think I understand your analysis, but this is what confuses me: In the {Qo'noS nujaHmoH}, the word {Qo'noS} isn't the direct object. So, since the direct object is "us", and {Qo'noS} is the indirect object, how can it be interpreted as the destination ? ~ channgan
On 10/20/2018 1:37 PM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
SuStel:
It's all about whether the locative is the direct object or not. If it is, it's the destination. If it isn't, it's not the destination.
I think I understand your analysis, but this is what confuses me:
In the {Qo'noS nujaHmoH}, the word {Qo'noS} isn't the direct object. So, since the direct object is "us", and {Qo'noS} is the indirect object, how can it be interpreted as the destination ?
Your analysis is wrong. In *Qo'noS nujaHmoH,* the direct object is *Qo'noS* and the indirect object is the elided /us./ When you use the prefix trick, you make the verb prefix agree with the indirect object instead of the direct object. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
participants (2)
-
mayqel qunenoS -
SuStel