[Tlhingan-hol] Objects, direct and indirect

[SuStel]

On 11/20/2015 11:21 PM, lojmIt tI'wI' nuv 'utlh wrote:
> I have a nasty suspicion that when dealing with the specific verb and
> suffix {ghojmoH} that the translator may have fallen to the English
> “teach” without considering that it really means “cause to learn.”

Okrand was the translator. Errors are always possible. However, this is 
hardly an isolated case.

Another example is our old friend, {ghaHvaD quHDaj qawmoH} "it reminds 
him of his heritage." Once again, we have what appears to be a 
"ditransitive" verb, but what we get is the semantic direct object 
dominating over the semantic indirect object for the syntactic object 
position.

{-moH} doesn't mean "subject becomes object," it means "subject causes 
verb to happen." What verb DOES never changes. The direct and/or 
indirect objects of the verb must be determined semantically, by 
deciding what the action is done TO (direct object) and whom the action 
is done FOR (indirect object). It's not determined by a syntactic rule.

Hence, all of these are valid:

    ghaHvaD quHDaj qawmoH 'oH
    it reminds him of his heritage

    ghaH qawmoH 'oH
    it reminds him

    ghaHvaD qawmoH 'oH
    it reminds him (of things in general)

    quHlIj qaqawmoH
    I remind you of your heritage

    SoHvaD quHlIj vIqawmoH
    I remind you of your heritage

and maybe even

    quHwIj vIqawmoHlu'
    I am reminded of my heritage

though I don't feel comfortable going so far as

    quHwIj vIqaw'eghmoH
    I remind myself of my heritage

 > I think that a verb’s relationship with its objects are among the
 > most arbitrary of elements in language. A direct object is really
 > almost like a clipped form of an indirect object or a prepositional
 > object, chosen for a specific verb. Another verb may have a different
 > link to the same object.

Yes, but the link is semantic, not syntactic. Semantically, the target 
of {ghojmoH} is the thing learned and the recipient of {ghojmoH} is the 
person who learns it. Syntactically, the object (not direct object) of 
{ghojmoH} is simply the thing to which {ghojmoH}, whatever it means, is 
done.

Syntax is structure; semantics is meaning. Syntactically, Klingon 
sentences have one subject and one object (not including null cases), 
and any other words are syntactically just "other words that come at the 
beginning." Semantically, Klingon sentences have subjects (who do the 
verb) direct objects (on whom the verb occurs) and indirect objects (who 
receives the action; again, not including null cases), and either direct 
or indirect object can be placed in the syntactic object position, with 
direct objects trumping indirect objects. The verb prefix agrees with 
one of those semantic roles; it is not chosen syntactically.

It's not enough to say "such-and-such verb takes such-and-such noun as 
its direct object." You have to specify what sorts of direct AND 
indirect objects are allowed, and they will be governed by the rules 
I've presented.

You can't just say, "the object of {ja'} is the person spoken to." The 
semantic direct object of {ja'} is the thing said; the semantic indirect 
object is the person spoken to. Once you've got that, you know that 
either of those can be the syntactic object, and that the thing said 
trumps the person it's said to if there's a question as to which one 
becomes the syntactic object, and that you can use the prefix trick to 
refer to an implicit first- or second-person told-to person while also 
using the thing said explicitly.

 > Forgive me if I continue to express things in ways that better fit
 > more conventional grammatical constructions.

List conventions have never been good at explaining things like {ghaHvaD 
quHDaj qawmoH} or {SengmeywIj vIja'laHbe'} or why the prefix trick 
works. A more subtle understanding is needed. Klingon is not, dare I 
say, a mere code where you can plug words into subject and object 
positions and expect to be speaking correctly. In Klingon sentences, 
semantics are REQUIRED in order to understand why things work the way 
they do, and in order to form better sentences.

-- 
SuStel
http://www.trimboli.name/