[85073] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: A fun application of the "prefix trick"
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Doq)
Thu Sep 18 17:29:50 2008
From: Doq <doq@embarqmail.com>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
In-Reply-To: <831858.87888.qm@web82608.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 17:27:01 -0400
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Obviously, I owe Ter'eS an apology. There is indeed one example of
unexplained canon backing up his version of grammatical truth. It
seems like a stretch to claim that all those examples of intransitive
verbs with {-moH} are using the prefix trick. It also seems odd to
have any negative feelings at all for the X-meH Y-moH translation of
this sort of thing. It's not a dodge. It's just another approach, and
quite a valid one, far easier to wrap my brain around than this one
rather ugly bit of canon.
Maybe Okrand was having a bad day when he wrote it. This does happen,
you know.
Were that the world were more perfect and Maltz gave us more
explanations or more examples of these areas of the grammar that seem
ill-described and poorly understood, as well as unnecessarily complex.
Doq
On Sep 17, 2008, at 9:31 PM, Terrence Donnelly wrote:
> --- On Wed, 9/17/08, Doq <doq@embarqmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Second, don't start an old argument and claim that you
>> aren't starting
>> an old argument.
>
> What I meant was, I will not waste bandwidth rehashing old arguments
> that can never be resolved by anything other than Okrand's
> intervention. However, that doesn't mean I will let someone speak as
> if the issue was settled, without a protest. If you are interested
> in my side of the debate, you can check here:
> http://teresh.tdonnelly.org/kligramm.html
>
>>
>> For all new students of the Klingon language, please note
>> that there
>> is not a single instance of canon or any description from
>> Okrand that
>> suggests that when you add {-moH} to a verb, it doesn't
>> change the
>> direct object of the verb.
>
> There's also no suggestion anywhere that it does.
>
>> This is wholly Ter'eS's
>> idea. Maybe he has
>> convinced someone else here as well. If so, I'm sure
>> we'll hear from
>> them.
>
> ghaHvaD quHDaj qawmoH Ha'quj 'his sash reminds him of his
> heritage.' [Skybox card 20]
>
> How would _you_ say "He remembers his heritage"?
>
>>
>> Meanwhile, there are plenty of examples of {-moH} changing
>> the direct
>> object of a verb.
>
> Please cite some. We have several examples of intransitive verbs
> taking -moH and an object, but as far as I know, the above sentence
> is the only one where a transitive verb takes -moH _and_ has an
> object _and_ has a causee.
>
> -- ter'eS
>
>
