[83832] in tlhIngan-Hol

home help back first fref pref prev next nref lref last post

{-lu'} vs {-moH}

daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Doq)
Fri Jan 4 12:13:24 2008

From: Doq <doq@embarqmail.com>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 12:10:46 -0500
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org

Yep. Digging into this gets ugly.

The transitivity thing basically comes down to this:

If it is really a transitive verb that could be mistaken for an  
intransitive verb because of usage with an indefinite object and you  
want to use it intransitively, you need to use {-lu'}. If it is really  
an intransitive verb and you want to use it transitively, then you  
need to use {-moH}. Take {chagh} for instance.

I drop a rock. The rock drops. One usage is transitive. The other  
usage is intransitive. If {chagh} is really intransitive in meaning,  
then the first sentence needs to be {nagh vIchaghmoH}. If {chagh} is  
really transitive, then the second sentence needs to be {nagh  
chaghlu'}. If {chagh} exactly mimics the English "drop", then you can  
say both {nagh vIchagh} and {chagh nagh}.

It would be a little disappointing if {chagh} exactly mimics "drop",  
since we have these affixes that could cover the other meaning. If we  
don't have one right meaning for this verb, Klingon loses both clarity  
and efficiency if we waste affixes like this.

English seems particularly vague about these verbs of motion, like  
"drop" or "move", though "ascend" and "descend" are only intransitive  
in English, as are "accelerate" and "decelerate". Meanwhile, "lift" is  
only transitive (or indefinite, but definitely not intransitive). But  
Klingon doesn't have a word for "lift", except perhaps {SalmoH}. It  
does have {chung}, {Sal} and {ghIr}.

So, of the Klingon verbs of motion that I can think of, all of them  
are either intransitive or ambiguous in English. None are exclusively  
transitive. So, would that suggest that in Klingon, the intransitive  
versions of the verbs of motion are consistently what is intended?

Most likely, there are exclusively transitive Klingon verbs of motion  
that I'm just not coming up with and someone else will prove that,  
beyond a shadow of a doubt, many Klingon verbs of motion are exactly  
as ambiguous about transitivity in Klingon as they are in English.

ghomeyDaq jIjatlhmo', jItlhIj.

Doq



home help back first fref pref prev next nref lref last post