Is the {pa'Daq dog lu'elmoH} correct for "they caused the dog to enter the room" ? qunnoq
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 9:43 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
Is the {pa'Daq dog lu'elmoH} correct for "they caused the dog to enter the room" ?
qunnoq
Voragh already discussed the part about {-Daq} being unnecessary with {'el}. As for causatives with two objects, there are a few examples where the thing being caused to do something (in this case, the dog) is marked with {-vaD}. The thing being entered (or the object of the verb, generally speaking) doesn't change its role in the sentence. The pattern seems to be that if X causes Y to do (verb) to Z, the sentence is: Y-vaD Z verb-moH X. So the sentence you're looking for is {dogvaD pa' lu'elmoH}. One canon example is {ghaHvaD quHDaj qawmoH} from Skybox card 20. http://klingonska.org/canon/sbx-s19.html The English translation on the card doesn't quite match the Klingon, which means something like "It causes him [Worf] to remember his heritage", with {ghaH} marked with {-vaD}.
So, the following sentence which voragh wrote: voragh:
pa'Daq mo’ DOG lu'elmoH in the room, they caused the dog to enter the cage
Is wrong, and should be {pa'Daq, dogvaD mo' lu'elmoH} ? qunnoq On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 5:55 PM, nIqolay Q <niqolay0@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 9:43 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
Is the {pa'Daq dog lu'elmoH} correct for "they caused the dog to enter the room" ?
qunnoq
Voragh already discussed the part about {-Daq} being unnecessary with {'el}. As for causatives with two objects, there are a few examples where the thing being caused to do something (in this case, the dog) is marked with {-vaD}. The thing being entered (or the object of the verb, generally speaking) doesn't change its role in the sentence. The pattern seems to be that if X causes Y to do (verb) to Z, the sentence is:
Y-vaD Z verb-moH X.
So the sentence you're looking for is {dogvaD pa' lu'elmoH}.
One canon example is {ghaHvaD quHDaj qawmoH} from Skybox card 20. http://klingonska.org/canon/sbx-s19.html The English translation on the card doesn't quite match the Klingon, which means something like "It causes him [Worf] to remember his heritage", with {ghaH} marked with {-vaD}.
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:00 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
So, the following sentence which voragh wrote:
voragh:
pa'Daq mo’ DOG lu'elmoH in the room, they caused the dog to enter the cage
Is wrong, and should be {pa'Daq, dogvaD mo' lu'elmoH} ?
If I'm correct about the {-moH/-vaD} thing (and I like to think that I am, though Voragh has far more canon knowledge than I do), then yes, his example was wrong, and {pa'Daq dogvaD mo' lu'elmoH} would be correct. (The comma is probably unnecessary.)
I freely admit that my example is wrong… that’s why I suggested someone else explain the subtleties of {‘elmoH} – which are frequently discussed on this list. I added an unnecessary comma merely to separate the two parts of the sentence, but brackets would have done as well. ({pa’} is probably not the best example as it means both “room” and “there(abouts)”, the latter never taking {-Daq}.) --Voragh From: tlhIngan-Hol [mailto:tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org] On Behalf Of nIqolay Q On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:00 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com<mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>> wrote: So, the following sentence which voragh wrote: voragh:
pa'Daq mo’ DOG lu'elmoH in the room, they caused the dog to enter the cage
Is wrong, and should be {pa'Daq, dogvaD mo' lu'elmoH} ? If I'm correct about the {-moH/-vaD} thing (and I like to think that I am, though Voragh has far more canon knowledge than I do), then yes, his example was wrong, and {pa'Daq dogvaD mo' lu'elmoH} would be correct. (The comma is probably unnecessary.)
nIqolay Q:
{pa'Daq dogvaD mo' lu'elmoH}
What is the {mo'} ? qunnoq On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu> wrote:
I freely admit that my example is wrong… that’s why I suggested someone else explain the subtleties of {‘elmoH} – which are frequently discussed on this list. I added an unnecessary comma merely to separate the two parts of the sentence, but brackets would have done as well. ({pa’} is probably not the best example as it means both “room” and “there(abouts)”, the latter never taking {-Daq}.)
--Voragh
From: tlhIngan-Hol [mailto:tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org] On Behalf Of nIqolay Q
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:00 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
So, the following sentence which voragh wrote:
voragh:
pa'Daq mo’ DOG lu'elmoH in the room, they caused the dog to enter the cage
Is wrong, and should be {pa'Daq, dogvaD mo' lu'elmoH} ?
If I'm correct about the {-moH/-vaD} thing (and I like to think that I am, though Voragh has far more canon knowledge than I do), then yes, his example was wrong, and {pa'Daq dogvaD mo' lu'elmoH} would be correct. (The comma is probably unnecessary.)
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
nIqolay Q:
{pa'Daq dogvaD mo' lu'elmoH} jIH: What is the {mo'} ?
Oh sorry; forget I asked. Obviously you were translating voragh's sentence; I thought you were translating mine.. qunnoq On Aug 21, 2017 7:43 PM, "mayqel qunenoS" <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
nIqolay Q:
{pa'Daq dogvaD mo' lu'elmoH}
What is the {mo'} ?
qunnoq
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu> wrote:
I freely admit that my example is wrong… that’s why I suggested someone else explain the subtleties of {‘elmoH} – which are frequently discussed on this list. I added an unnecessary comma merely to separate the two parts of the sentence, but brackets would have done as well. ({pa’} is probably not the best example as it means both “room” and “there(abouts)”, the latter never taking {-Daq}.)
--Voragh
From: tlhIngan-Hol [mailto:tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org] On Behalf Of nIqolay Q
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:00 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
So, the following sentence which voragh wrote:
voragh:
pa'Daq mo’ DOG lu'elmoH in the room, they caused the dog to enter the cage
Is wrong, and should be {pa'Daq, dogvaD mo' lu'elmoH} ?
If I'm correct about the {-moH/-vaD} thing (and I like to think that I am, though Voragh has far more canon knowledge than I do), then yes, his example was wrong, and {pa'Daq dogvaD mo' lu'elmoH} would be correct. (The comma is probably unnecessary.)
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
participants (3)
-
mayqel qunenoS -
nIqolay Q -
Steven Boozer