[102436] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] KLBC : Sentences as objects
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (SuStel)
Thu Nov 19 09:29:41 2015
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
From: SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 09:29:24 -0500
In-Reply-To: <CA+7zAmNeLMMqXk-ofnE72KRpHUrJHuyLSj9Kp5uudUOhYGxTHw@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
On 11/19/2015 5:25 AM, De'vID wrote:
> TKD is full of examples of {ja'} used with the person addressed as the
> object. No need to list those.
But one must point out that it's impossible to say whether the person
addressed is the direct object or the indirect object.
qaja'pu'
Is it:
[SoH] qaja'pu'
or
[SoHvaD] qaja'pu'
(don't interpret those as sentences; they're meant to be illustrations
of the target of the prefix)
?
Both are allowed when one considers the prefix trick.
Nearly every example in canon has this ambiguity.
> The {paq'batlh}
I keep forgetting to bring it with me to work for reference. We gotta
get this thing published for Kindle so I can search it!
> has a number of instances of {ja'} where the content of what's told
> is the object of {ja'}:
>
> {Qo'noSDaq boqwI'mey / nejmeH je leng qeylIS / 'ej chaHvaD lut ja'}
> "Kahless also went out to search / For allies across Kronos, / And
> told them his tale."
>
> {wIj jup / SengmeywIj vIja'laHbe' / jIHvaD ratlh pagh}
> "Dear old friend, / I cannot speak of my tragedies, / There is nothing
> left for me."
This clinches it for me: the direct object of {ja'} is the thing told,
not the person told to.
> The {paq'batlh} also has some instances where the person addressed is
> the object of {ja'}. So it has both.
Anything explicit? Or just more prefix-trick ambiguity?
> There's also this phrase from the greeting video sent out by Marc
> Okrand about the opera {'u'}:
> {qatlh tlhIngan lut luja' tera'ngan DawI'pu'lI'?}
> Why are your earthling actors telling a Klingon story?
Direct object is thing told, not person told to.
> It seems to me that the way to make sense of all of this is that,
> while in proper grammar the object of {ja'} is the thing reported and
> the recipient is indicated with {-vaD}, in "typical" usage it just
> happens to be the case that the prefix trick is applied very often
> with this verb, making it look as if the person addressed is the
> "typical" object.
Exactly.
--
SuStel
http://trimboli.name
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
