[86752] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: intuition and grammar (was Re: Ditransitive reflexives)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Doty)
Sat Oct 31 17:49:20 2009
In-Reply-To: <6488.81381.qm@web82605.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
From: Christopher Doty <suomichris@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 14:47:13 -0700
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 14:34, Terrence Donnelly
<terrence.donnelly@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Actually, only used with subjects; verbs with {-chuq} have no objects.
Right, because -chuq indicates that the subject and the direct object
are the same. It doesn't indicate, though, that the subject and the
indirect object are the same.
> I wish we'd get off this "ditransitive" topic, which has really had no relevance to this discussion for a long time, > especially to someone who, like me, doesn't really buy the notion of ditransitive verbs in English, in the first
> place.
I'm not sure what you mean about not buying the concept in English,
but the question remains: how would one say "they gave themselves
chocolate" in Klingon?
Chris
