[102003] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] roj
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (De'vID)
Sat Nov 7 07:51:54 2015
In-Reply-To: <563DEB87.6000404@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2015 13:51:36 +0100
From: "De'vID" <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com>
To: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
On 7 November 2015 at 13:16, Lieven <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:
> Yes, as you say it's just speculation, either way. I believ that rij can NOT
> take an oject. It's defined as "make peace", so actually the object is
> inluded already. At least from english point of view, it makes no sense
> saying "He makes peace something".
Except that the English definitions of verbs often include objects (or
types of objects) which the verb is allowed to take.
{qID} "make a joke"
{vulqangan jIH 'e' vIqID} "I joked that I am a Vulcan"
{Qagh} "make an error"
{jIjatlhHa' 'e' vIQagh} "I made the mistake of misspeaking"
{vIt} "tell the truth"
{tlhIngan jIH 'e' vIvIt} "I tell the truth that I am Klingon"
{vut} "prepare food, make a beverage"
{tlhImqach vIvut} "I prepare zilm'kach"
I think it's uncontroversial that the above are allowed. By the same
reasoning, {roj} "make peace" includes that the object is peace, so it
follows that it can (or at least might be able to) take {roj} (noun)
as its object.
{tera'nganpu'vaD tlhInganpu'vaD je 'orghen roj lurojmoH 'orghenganpu'}
> Another question is then, would I say {rojmoHwI'} or {rojwI'}? :-D
I would think that would depend on the volition of the participants.
Chancellor Gorkon would be a {rojwI'}.
The Organians would be {rojmoHwI'}.
--
De'vID
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
