Translation:We point at the teacher with our middle fingers.
Query whether the ruder version would be ghojmoHwI'vaD qaywI'maj DIcha' ("We show our middle fingers to the teacher").
Although it does occur to me that "to point with the middle finger" might not necessary mean to point with the tip of the middle finger; I suppose you can also "point" with the back of the finger, which of course puts back into rude territory.
Remember also, that the finger verbs don't actually mean "to point", they mean, "to use the particular finger". It might be pointing, it might be pressing, it might be some standard gesture, etc. So maqay really just means "we use the middle finger" and it's left to the listener to imagine how the middle finger is being used.
Yes, but per the Tips & Notes:
The object of such a verb, if present, is the item which is manipulated or touched with that finger or toe, similar to the English usage of "to thumb a switch = to flip a switch using the thumb".
If the verb has no object, but there is a noun with the locative suffix -Daq, then the meaning of the finger/toe verbs is "point" -- for example, lurvengDaq jISIq "I 'indexfinger' at Lurveng" would mean "I point at Lurveng with my index finger".
The sentence here has -Daq, suggesting that the verb means to point.
If we are somehow "using" the middle finger on the teacher (Good heavens!), then I think that the sentence would have to read ghojmoHwi' wIqay.
Perhaps I am being too broad in my interpretation of the finger verbs with -Daq. The original quote from Maltz says:
When used with note with the locative suffix -Daq, the finger verbs mean "point (with a specific finger (at or towards."
But I feel that was not meant to restrict the usage only to "point", but to differentiate touching verses gesturing.
So I would interpret ghojmoHwI' wIqay as "we use the middle fingers ON the teacher" and ghojmoHwI'Daq maqay as "we use the middle fingers AT the teacher."