[86693] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: Ditransitive reflexives
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tracy Canfield)
Tue Oct 27 09:52:50 2009
In-Reply-To: <C305E6BD33E2654DAE1F8F403247B6A60113817CAFDB@EVS02.ad.uchicago.edu>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 09:50:29 -0400
From: Tracy Canfield <toastrix@gmail.com>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Thanks! Do you have something comparable for 'egh? Obviously they can't
occur in exactly the same contexts, since -chuq is limited to plural
subjects, and sometimes one is meaningful where the other wouldn't be - but
since they're both reflexives, it would be nice to compare the two
distributions.
2009/10/27 Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu>
>
> I don't want to get into speculative grammar, but here is all I have in my
> notes about {-chuq} "reciprocal" together with all known examples:
>
>
> TKD 36: This suffix is used only with plural subjects. It is translated
> each other or one another. The prefix set indicating "no object" is also
> used when this suffix is used:
> {maqIpchuq} we hit each other
> {SuqIpchuq} you (plural) hit each other
> {qIpchuq} they hit each other
> {peqIpchuq} hit each other!
>
>
> KGT 158: If one wanted to say that two persons collide but not imply that
> they butt heads, the verb {ngeQ} would probably be used along with the
> suffix {-chuq} ("each other") as in {ngeQchuq tera'nganpu'} ("The Terrans
> collide with each other").
>
>
> {ja'chuqmeH rojHom neH jaghla'}
> The enemy commander wishes a truce (in order) to confer. TKD
>
> {maja'chuqjaj?}
> Can we talk? PK
>
> {'uQ wISoppu'DI' maja'chuq}
> We will talk after dinner. PK
>
> {ghobchuq loDnI'pu'}
> "The Brothers Battle One Another"
> (the name of the Kahless and Morath statuette) KCD
>
> {pujchuqmoH}
> they weaken each other (st.klingon [11/1997])
>
> {Hay'chuq}
> They duel one another. KGT
>
> {Hay'chuqchu'}
> They duel one another to the death (i.e. "perfectly"). KGT
>
>
>
> --
> Voragh
> Canon Master of the Klingons
>
>
>
>
