[112158] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] naDev and 'el
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Will Martin)
Mon Mar 11 12:50:28 2019
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
From: Will Martin <willmartin2@mac.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 12:50:22 -0400
In-Reply-To: <c3d7df66-9697-15ac-8e7d-f43d38639a03@trimboli.name>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Cc: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
--===============6488496326216453795==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="Apple-Mail=_906C38BC-DDB5-4023-92AA-A5EF8BCA2C70"
--Apple-Mail=_906C38BC-DDB5-4023-92AA-A5EF8BCA2C70
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=utf-8
I honestly disagree about {=E2=80=98el} having locative objects=E2=80=A6 =
or at least I think I disagree, since this is one of those things that =
is hard enough to converse about without everyone getting confused about =
what the other person is saying. We may very well mean exactly the same =
thing. I=E2=80=99m just confused about the wording.
Okay, so here I go, trying to be clear=E2=80=A6
{=E2=80=98el} is a kind of motion. A being or thing is in motion. It=E2=80=
=99s the subject and the agent, if you will.
The motion occurs at a place. That=E2=80=99s the whole point of the =
verb. The object of {=E2=80=98el} is the destination, just as the object =
of {ghoS} is the path. The motion of {=E2=80=98el} has an indefinite =
beginning and a specific end point. The motion of {ghoS} has undefined =
beginning and end with a path that has a name, which quite often =
corresponds to the destination, but that is not necessarily the case. I =
can {ghoS} Interstate 95 without making any reference to my destination. =
I can also {ghoS} Washington, DC, which is a destination I can get to =
via Interstate 95, and basically, I=E2=80=99d be calling Interstate 95 =
=E2=80=9CThe Washington, DC road=E2=80=9D.
You don=E2=80=99t need {-Daq} on the object of {ghoS} or {=E2=80=98el}. =
The structure or area one enters can be named without grammatically =
notating it as a location. The fact that you are entering it implies =
that it is a location. If a drug enters the bloodstream, in terms of =
meaning, the bloodstream is a location. Everything you enter is a =
location.
In English, =E2=80=9CI enter the stadium=E2=80=9D. It would be weird to =
say, =E2=80=9CI enter into the stadium,=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9CI enter at =
the stadium.=E2=80=9D The preposition is unnecessary because that =
locational meaning is built into the meaning of the verb. In this case, =
I think Klingon is similar. It would be strange to put {-Daq} on the =
direct object of {=E2=80=98el}. It would feel redundant, and then =
you=E2=80=99d need some kind of reason for having expressed that =
redundancy.
It would also be a little confusing, since the use of {-Daq} suggests at =
least the possibility that it=E2=80=99s not the direct object of the =
verb. Like instead of saying =E2=80=9CI entered the stadium,=E2=80=9D =
you might say =E2=80=9CI entered [the stadium] at the front gate.=E2=80=9D=
You are not really saying that you enter the front gate. You enter AT =
the front gate. You enter the stadium=E2=80=A6 at the front gate.
Is that clear enough, or is this yet another argument, where we mean the =
same thing and argue over the one and only right way to say it?
charghwI=E2=80=99 vaghnerya=E2=80=99ngan
rInpa=E2=80=99 bomnIS be=E2=80=99=E2=80=99a=E2=80=99 pI=E2=80=99.
> On Mar 11, 2019, at 12:11 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
>=20
> On 3/11/2019 12:04 PM, Steven Boozer wrote:
>> {naDev Da=E2=80=99elpa=E2=80=99}.=20
>>=20
>> =20
>>=20
>> If you asking about {naDev}, it=E2=80=99s a noun in Klingon not an =
adverbial, and thus can be the object of a verb. If you=E2=80=99re =
asking whether {=E2=80=98el} takes an object, it does; e.g.:
>>=20
>> =20
>>=20
>> tach vI'el, HItlhej=20
>> Let's go to the pub. (RT)
>>=20
>> Hevetlh wIghoSchugh veH tIn wI'el maH'e'
>>=20
>> that course will take us into the [Great] Barrier as well! (ST5)
>>=20
>> =20
>>=20
>> neHmaH Da'el net tu'=20
>> Caught breaching the Neutral Zone. (MKE)
>>=20
> He's asking whether 'el is a verb with an inherent locative sense. The =
answer is no, it is not. The object of 'el does not have to be a =
locative. The fact that naDev is automatically locative doesn't change =
the lack of locative requirements of 'el.
>=20
> tugh naDev wI'el
> Soon we will enter here.
>=20
> It's awkward in English to say enter here; I wonder if naDev being =
inherently locative makes this just as awkward in Klingon. You might =
prefer sentences like tugh pa'vam wI'el or tugh Daqvam wI'el.
>=20
> --=20
> SuStel
> http://trimboli.name =
<http://trimboli.name/>_______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
--Apple-Mail=_906C38BC-DDB5-4023-92AA-A5EF8BCA2C70
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=utf-8
<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dutf-8"></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=3D""><div =
class=3D"">I honestly disagree about {=E2=80=98el} having locative =
objects=E2=80=A6 or at least I think I disagree, since this is one of =
those things that is hard enough to converse about without everyone =
getting confused about what the other person is saying. We may very well =
mean exactly the same thing. I=E2=80=99m just confused about the =
wording.</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">Okay, =
so here I go, trying to be clear=E2=80=A6</div><div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">{=E2=80=98el} is a kind of motion. A =
being or thing is in motion. It=E2=80=99s the subject and the agent, if =
you will.</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">The =
motion occurs at a place. That=E2=80=99s the whole point of the verb. =
The object of {=E2=80=98el} is the destination, just as the object of =
{ghoS} is the path. The motion of {=E2=80=98el} has an indefinite =
beginning and a specific end point. The motion of {ghoS} has undefined =
beginning and end with a path that has a name, which quite often =
corresponds to the destination, but that is not necessarily the case. I =
can {ghoS} Interstate 95 without making any reference to my destination. =
I can also {ghoS} Washington, DC, which is a destination I can get to =
via Interstate 95, and basically, I=E2=80=99d be calling Interstate 95 =
=E2=80=9CThe Washington, DC road=E2=80=9D.</div><div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">You don=E2=80=99t need {-Daq} on the =
object of {ghoS} or {=E2=80=98el}. The structure or area one enters can =
be named without grammatically notating it as a location. The fact that =
you are entering it implies that it is a location. If a drug enters the =
bloodstream, in terms of meaning, the bloodstream is a location. =
Everything you enter is a location.</div><div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">In English, =E2=80=9CI enter the =
stadium=E2=80=9D. It would be weird to say, =E2=80=9CI enter into the =
stadium,=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9CI enter at the stadium.=E2=80=9D The =
preposition is unnecessary because that locational meaning is built into =
the meaning of the verb. In this case, I think Klingon is similar. It =
would be strange to put {-Daq} on the direct object of {=E2=80=98el}. It =
would feel redundant, and then you=E2=80=99d need some kind of reason =
for having expressed that redundancy.</div><div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">It would also be a little confusing, =
since the use of {-Daq} suggests at least the possibility that it=E2=80=99=
s not the direct object of the verb. Like instead of saying =E2=80=9CI =
entered the stadium,=E2=80=9D you might say =E2=80=9CI entered [the =
stadium] at the front gate.=E2=80=9D You are not really saying that you =
enter the front gate. You enter AT the front gate. You enter the =
stadium=E2=80=A6 at the front gate.</div><div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">Is that clear enough, or is this yet =
another argument, where we mean the same thing and argue over the one =
and only right way to say it?</div><br class=3D""><div class=3D"">
<div dir=3D"auto" style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: =
space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=3D""><div =
style=3D"caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: =
Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: =
normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; =
text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; =
word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: =
none;">charghwI=E2=80=99 vaghnerya=E2=80=99ngan<br class=3D""><br =
class=3D"">rInpa=E2=80=99 bomnIS be=E2=80=99=E2=80=99a=E2=80=99 =
pI=E2=80=99.</div><div style=3D"caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, =
0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; =
font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; =
text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: =
normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; =
text-decoration: none;" class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"></div><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
<div><br class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D""><div =
class=3D"">On Mar 11, 2019, at 12:11 PM, SuStel <<a =
href=3D"mailto:sustel@trimboli.name" =
class=3D"">sustel@trimboli.name</a>> wrote:</div><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=3D"">
=20
<meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3DUTF-8" class=3D"">
=20
<div text=3D"#000000" bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF" class=3D"">
<div class=3D"moz-cite-prefix">On 3/11/2019 12:04 PM, Steven Boozer
wrote:<br class=3D"">
</div>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" =
cite=3D"mid:BL0PR11MB3379BBBC3F79A345FFE49937C1480@BL0PR11MB3379.namprd11.=
prod.outlook.com" class=3D""><p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span =
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color=
:#1F497D" class=3D"">{naDev
Da=E2=80=99elpa=E2=80=99}.
<o:p class=3D""></o:p></span></p><p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span =
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color=
:#1F497D" class=3D""><o:p class=3D""> </o:p></span></p><p =
class=3D"MsoNormal"><span =
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color=
:#1F497D" class=3D"">If
you asking about {naDev}, it=E2=80=99s a noun in Klingon not =
an
adverbial, and thus can be the object of a verb. If =
you=E2=80=99re
asking whether {=E2=80=98el} takes an object, it does; =
e.g.:<o:p class=3D""></o:p></span></p><p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span =
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color=
:#1F497D" class=3D""><o:p class=3D""> </o:p></span></p><p =
class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b class=3D"">tach =
vI'el</b>,
<b class=3D"">HItlhej</b>
<br class=3D"">
Let's go to the pub. (RT)<o:p class=3D""></o:p></p><p =
class=3D"MsoNormal"><b class=3D"">Hevetlh wIghoSchugh veH tIn wI'el =
maH'e'</b>
<o:p class=3D""></o:p></p><p class=3D"MsoNormal">that course =
will take <i class=3D"">us</i> into the [<i class=3D"">Great</i>]
Barrier as well! (ST5)<b class=3D""><o:p =
class=3D""></o:p></b></p><p class=3D"MsoNormal"><b class=3D""><o:p =
class=3D""> </o:p></b></p><p class=3D"MsoNormal" =
style=3D"margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b class=3D""><span style=3D"color:#C00000"=
class=3D"">neHmaH Da'el net tu'</span></b>
<br class=3D"">
Caught breaching the Neutral Zone. (MKE)</p>
</blockquote><p class=3D"">He's asking whether <b class=3D"">'el</b> =
is a verb with an inherent
locative sense. The answer is no, it is not. The object of <b =
class=3D"">'el</b>
does not have to be a locative. The fact that <b =
class=3D"">naDev</b> is
automatically locative doesn't change the lack of locative
requirements of <b class=3D"">'el.</b></p><p class=3D""><b =
class=3D"">tugh naDev wI'el<br class=3D"">
</b><i class=3D"">Soon we will enter here.</i></p><p class=3D"">It's=
awkward in English to say <i class=3D"">enter here;</i> I wonder if <b =
class=3D"">naDev</b>
being inherently locative makes this just as awkward in Klingon.
You might prefer sentences like <b class=3D"">tugh pa'vam =
wI'el</b> or <b class=3D"">tugh
Daqvam wI'el.</b><br class=3D"">
</p>
<pre class=3D"moz-signature" cols=3D"72">--=20
SuStel
<a class=3D"moz-txt-link-freetext" =
href=3D"http://trimboli.name/">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class=3D"">tlhIngan-Hol=
mailing list<br class=3D""><a href=3D"mailto:tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org" =
class=3D"">tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org</a><br =
class=3D"">http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org<br =
class=3D""></div></blockquote></div><br class=3D""></body></html>=
--Apple-Mail=_906C38BC-DDB5-4023-92AA-A5EF8BCA2C70--
--===============6488496326216453795==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
--===============6488496326216453795==--
