[Tlhingan-hol] Objects with -moH

Mon Jun 2 08:07:09 PDT 2014

Yes, the “prefix trick” and some excellent discussion that unites the canon is specifically referenced at the bottom of my first e-mail. I’m not confused about the grammar here. I want to make sure I’m neither being too careful nor too presumptuous in stating what is uncontroversial.

Are you suggesting that I introduce the prefix trick for the beginner now, reduce the material presented, or leave it the same? I want the beginner to know that there is more here than meets the eye, or they will assume some way is correct and start using it. *I* can avoid any situation that requires a choice of objects, but without pointing out to the beginner that the peril exists, I can’t keep her away from it.

- Qov

From: lojmIt tI'wI' nuv [mailto:lojmitti7wi7nuv at gmail.com] 
Sent: June 2, 2014 4:18
To: tlhIngan Hol mailing list
Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Objects with -moH

I'm sure I won't be the only person to suggest that the latter example given of {ghojmoH} is similar to examples using {nob} with the "prefix shortcut" for verbs many have called "ditransitive" referring to an indirect object treated as a direct object in order to slightly truncate the sentence. 

Here the implied, truncated translation is "The mother teaches him grammar." And since you are not teaching the use of {-vaD}, you can't use {SoHvaD}.

Likely, it's good to dodge the topic for beginners and bring this up later, at the end of a lesson that DOES teach {-vaD}. It is good to point out that while "teach" is a good translation for {ghojmoH}, that doesn't make it grammatically different from {ghoj} + {-moH}. Having a separate listing in the English->Klingon side of the dictionary does not imply a separate Klingon root verb. 

Sent from my iPad

On Jun 2, 2014, at 2:48 AM, "Robyn Stewart" <robyn at flyingstart.ca> wrote:

Below is an excerpt from the online course lesson where I introduce –moH. My aim is to keep my own opinions out of the course, and to teach the student only what we KNOW, for the most part avoiding the unknown entirely. It’s not really fair to introduce –moH and not mention anything about using it with indirect objects. Canon and some previous discussions are referenced at the bottom. I am not trying to reinvent the wheel here.

I’m not looking for more opinions or theories or justifications on how –moH should work. The existence of civil disagreement among competent Klingonists is enough for me not to declare for one idea or the other. The suffix –vaD is not included in the level one grammar, so there’s no reason to go there. I’m just checking that I haven’t missed some canon that resolves this, and for opinions-expert or beginner—on the level of information included. Is there more beginners should know? Should I be more terse and simply say that canon is ambiguous on the object of this type of verb?
---
Things can get more complicated when –moH is used on a verb that could already take an object. This is an area where we don't have all the answers. For example, the word <ghojmoH> is formed from <ghoj> “learn” plus –moH, and means “cause to learn”, normally translated as “teach, instruct.” It even has its own listing in TKD as such. But what is the object of ghojmoH? 

Is it the student? That would seem to make sense. 
ghoj puq. – The child learns.
?puq ghojmoH SoS. – The mother causes the child to learn./The mother teaches the child.
We have evidence that this is the correct form, as in Power Klingon we hear the form <qaghojmoH> I instruct you.

Confusingly, we also have text written by Marc Okrand on a licenced trading card, which suggests that the object doesn't necessarily change when –moH is added to a verb.  The object of ghojmoH may be the same as the object of ghoj: the thing learned.

pab ghoj puq. – The child learns grammar.
?pab ghojmoH SoS. – The mother teaches grammar.

Maybe it can be either. We have other tools for indicating the second object of the verb, but they, and a full discussion of this question, are beyond the scope of this course. The purpose of this digression is to explain why this course doesn't include instructions on using such objects, and to give you some insight into how we know things about the Klingon language.

Reference:

TKD 4.2.4 p.38 Type 4: Cause

Skybox card S20 - ghaHvaD quHDaj qawmoH.

Power Klingon - batlh qaghojmoH
Okrand  <http://mughom.wikia.com/wiki/MSN?action=edit&redlink=1> MSN, 6/97 – Prefix trick

Also perused:
 <http://www.klingon.org/smboard/index.php?topic=556.25;wap2> http://www.klingon.org/smboard/index.php?topic=556.25;wap2
 <http://diswww.mit.edu/charon.MIT.EDU/ja%27chuq/85069> http://diswww.mit.edu/charon.MIT.EDU/ja%27chuq/85069
 <http://diswww.mit.edu/charon.MIT.EDU/ja%27chuq/93042> http://diswww.mit.edu/charon.MIT.EDU/ja%27chuq/93042  

- Qov

_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol at kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/attachments/20140602/d756c83b/attachment-0001.html>