[86863] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: Locatives
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Terrence Donnelly)
Tue Nov 17 12:58:37 2009
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:56:01 -0800 (PST)
From: Terrence Donnelly <terrence.donnelly@sbcglobal.net>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
In-Reply-To: <1cb7130b0911170917v32565d4fq8f68ae1fa5f71bf8@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Voragh will be here soon with examples, but briefly...
--- On Tue, 11/17/09, Tracy Canfield <toastrix@gmail.com> wrote:
> Are there any limits on which nouns
> may take the -Daq ending?
>
> (1) Can it be used with nouns referring to
> people? Some languages
> with locative constructions use them with nouns for people,
> with
> meanings along the lines of "where so-and-so is" or "at
> so-and-so's
> house." Does Klingon allow this?
I've never seen this usage in Klingon.
>
> (1a) And if it does, can -Daq be used with
> pronouns? We know that
> -'e', another Type 5 suffix, can attach to pronouns - do we
> know about
> -Daq?
>
I don't see why not, eg. {jIHDaq Sum Duj}. 'The ship is close to me.'
> (1b) Similarly, TKD 3.4 gives us nagh DungDaq "above
> the rock",
> formed using the noun-noun construction "nagh Dung" plus
> -Daq. We
> also know that pronouns can't be used in possessive
> constructions, and
> the possessive suffixes are used instead (TKD 5.1).
>
> So would "above me" be DungwI'Daq?
No, these are a special case. In these cases, you use the independent pronoun in an N-N construction: {jIH DungDaq}. I think this is the only time you can use an independent pronoun to show possession.
>
> (2) Can -Daq be used with abstract nouns? It
> doesn't seem to have a
> metaphorical sense that locative constructions in other
> languages have
> - I think every example I've seen with it refers to a
> location in
> space.
>
I believe both {-Daq} and {-vo'} refer strictly to location (you couldn't use them, for example, to say that a work was translated from English into Klingon).
-- ter'eS
