[102473] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Tlhingan-hol Digest, Vol 51, Issue 138
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John R. Harness)
Fri Nov 20 19:50:43 2015
In-Reply-To: <mailman.2587.1448006704.29498.tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 18:50:27 -0600
From: "John R. Harness" <cartweel@gmail.com>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
--===============1137856429214776782==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113f9bdecdc6fc05250260ef
--001a113f9bdecdc6fc05250260ef
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Hi! Thanks for using the KLBC tag!
Yes, you can specify both places with {-vo'} and {-Daq}. There's no
grammatical or stylistic reason to not specify, if you want.
Now, if you are trying to translate "from room to room," then you do need
to be careful that you're not shoehorning the English phrase. But, as you
go on to show, there are a variety of ways that you could express the idea
-- what you choose to use comes down to style. You can decide whether to
use a more specific verb (as you do with {chegh}) or you could restate as
multiple phrases, as you also show.
For what it's worth, your translations of your examples leave me wondering
if you are speaking of a spirit moving from one room into another, or of a
spirit who is only going into and out of one room. Perhaps you could make
this less ambiguous by choosing to use {-vam} and {-vetlh}, if it is
relevant.
'arHa
Beginner's Grammarian
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 18:26:17 -0500
From: fata irae <fatairae@gmail.com>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Subject: [Tlhingan-hol] KLBC: multiple locatives
Message-ID:
<CA+_YdevDa=Y3r_XnE7bj1iQ-gYfvMCSchcRfeXV=4AJU5AjqCQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
When there is motion from one place to another, is it
appropriate/acceptable to specify both places? And more specifically, is
it acceptable to specify multiple objects/non-objects?
pa'vo' pa'Daq vIHtaH qa'
The spirit keeps moving from room to room.
Or is this an example of shoe-horning a english construct to tlhIngan?
Would it be more appropriate (following simplicity), to say:
pa'vo' vIHtaH qa', 'ej pa'Daq vIHtaH qa'
The spirit keeps moving from the room, and keeps going to the room.
Or perhaps more eloquently,
'ej pa'Daq cheghtaH.
and keeps returning to the room.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://mail.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/attachments/20151119/0443b900/attachment-0001.html
>
--001a113f9bdecdc6fc05250260ef
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div><div><div><div>Hi! Thanks for using the KLB=
C tag!<br><br></div>Yes, you can specify both places with {-vo'} and {-=
Daq}. There's no grammatical or stylistic reason to not specify, if you=
want.<br><br></div>Now, if you are trying to translate "from room to =
room," then you do need to be careful that you're not shoehorning =
the English phrase. But, as you go on to show, there are a variety of ways =
that you could express the idea -- what you choose to use comes down to sty=
le. You can decide whether to use a more specific verb (as you do with {che=
gh}) or you could restate as multiple phrases, as you also show.<br><br></d=
iv>For what it's worth, your translations of your examples leave me won=
dering if you are speaking of a spirit moving from one room into another, o=
r of a spirit who is only going into and out of one room. Perhaps you could=
make this less ambiguous by choosing to use {-vam} and {-vetlh}, if it is =
relevant.<br><br></div>'arHa<br></div><div>Beginner's Grammarian<br=
></div><div><br>Message: 1<br>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 18:26:17 -0500<br>
From: fata irae <<a href=3D"mailto:fatairae@gmail.com">fatairae@gmail.co=
m</a>><br>
To: <a href=3D"mailto:tlhingan-hol@kli.org">tlhingan-hol@kli.org</a><br>
Subject: [Tlhingan-hol] KLBC: multiple locatives<br>
Message-ID:<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <CA+_YdevDa=3DY3r_XnE7bj1iQ-gYfvMCSchcRfeXV=
=3D<a href=3D"mailto:4AJU5AjqCQ@mail.gmail.com">4AJU5AjqCQ@mail.gmail.com</=
a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8"<br>
<br>
When there is motion from one place to another, is it<br>
appropriate/acceptable to specify both places?=C2=A0 And more specifically,=
is<br>
it acceptable to specify multiple objects/non-objects?<br>
<br>
pa'vo' pa'Daq vIHtaH qa'<br>
The spirit keeps moving from room to room.<br>
<br>
Or is this an example of shoe-horning a english construct to tlhIngan?<br>
Would it be more appropriate (following simplicity), to say:<br>
<br>
pa'vo' vIHtaH qa', 'ej pa'Daq vIHtaH qa'<br>
The spirit keeps moving from the room, and keeps going to the room.<br>
<br>
Or perhaps more eloquently,<br>
'ej pa'Daq cheghtaH.<br>
and keeps returning to the room.<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href=3D"http://mail.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/attachments/=
20151119/0443b900/attachment-0001.html" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank=
">http://mail.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/attachments/20151119/0443b900/=
attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
</div></div></div>
--001a113f9bdecdc6fc05250260ef--
--===============1137856429214776782==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
--===============1137856429214776782==--
