[102459] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] KLBC : Sentences as objects
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (De'vID)
Fri Nov 20 06:03:43 2015
In-Reply-To: <564DE75D.3080802@trimboli.name>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 12:03:19 +0100
From: "De'vID" <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com>
To: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
De'vID:
>> There's these three sentences (which occur together):
SuStel:
> Then it goes BOTH ways.
All the canon examples of {ja'} with explicit objects seem to fall
into these categories:
1. speech event as direct object
{SengmeywIj vIja'laHbe'}
2. recipient (apparently) as direct object
{loDnI'Daj vavDaj je ja' qeylIS}
3. both: speech event as direct object, recipients as indirect object
{'ej chaHvaD lut ja'}
4. ???
{quv HIja'chuqQo'}
I think #2 is just a clipped version of #3, with the {-vaD} dropped.
It's #4 that I can't wrap my head around. Presumably, it's a version
of: {jIHvaD quv yIja'[chuq?]Qo'}.
I can see the prefix trick shortening that to {quv HIja'Qo'}, but then
I can't explain the {-chuq}.
We have:
{jIHvaD quv Daja'} "You tell me of honour"
{SoHvaD quv vIja'} "I tell you of honour"
{maja'chuq} "We discuss, confer" ("We tell each other")
And then maybe we can make...
*{HIja'chuq} "Let's discuss, confer" (???)
*{HIja'chuqQo'} "Let's not discuss, confer" (???)
*{quv maja'chuq} "We tell each other of honour" (???!!!)
And then, somehow, we end up with:
{quv HIja'chuqQo'} "Don't speak to me of honor." (i.e., "Don't
discuss/confer about honour with me.")
Or maybe it's simpler to explain it away as an error...
--
De'vID
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
