[96064] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] mIl'oD veDDIr SuvwI': 17. ghojwI'pu'lI' tISaH
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rohan Fenwick)
Tue Apr 16 21:20:44 2013
From: Rohan Fenwick <qeslagh@hotmail.com>
To: "tlhingan-hol@kli.org" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 11:20:15 +1000
In-Reply-To: <F52986192E9FE346B0B7EF3D6F98E8771227D50A@EXDB3.ug.kth.se>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
ghItlhpu' loghaD, jatlh:
> From paq'batlh:
(poD)
chovnatlhmeylIjmo' Voragh chovnatlhmeymo' je Satlho'. lI'bej.
taH:
> Combining these examples, it seems to me that perhaps
> the object of
{toS} is the thing which one climbs.
Indeed - as you show, paq'raD 14:4 supports this explicitly: {...chalqach toS} "he climbs the tower".
> One's starting point is marked
with -vo', and one's destination with -Daq.
Again, an entirely reasonable conclusion.
> In that sense, it would
resemble {ghoS} in at least
> some respects, but perhaps not all.
There's the $64 question. ;) I guess what I wonder is if {qojDaq vItoS} "I climb (onto?) the cliff" is legal in the same way as {bIQtIqDaq vIjaH} "I go to the river" is.
>
Not sure if a person who climbs cliffs for sport with
> no real
destination would be said to {qoj toS} or
> {qojDaq toS}, though.
Well, I suppose there is still a destination as often as not - the top of the cliff (or, for abseilers, the bottom), so I reckon either {qoj toS} or {qojDaq toS} would probably be okay.
QeS
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
