tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Apr 18 15:31:26 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: -lu' with explicit objects
- From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
- Subject: Re: -lu' with explicit objects
- Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 17:34:01 -0500
marqoS writes:
>If a verb has an indefinite subject but a definite object, to be
>named explicitly as a noun rather than absorbed as the pronoun implied
>by the prefix, where does the noun go? Does it precede the verb, as an
>object, or follow it, as the subject (matching the prefix change
>brought on by {-lu'})?
It's still the object. It still precedes the verb. {-lu'} doesn't
turn the object into the subject; it just messes with the prefix.
There *is* no subject.
>My personal interpretation, made without referencing TKD since my copy
>is at home and I'm at work, is that it should match the verbal
>prefix and occupy the subject position. So, if Kruge had wanted to
>emphasize "you" in "You will be remembered with honor", it would be
> batlh Daqawlu'taH SoH
>and not
> batlh SoH Daqawlu'taH
>Agreed?
No. See TKD's description of {-lu'} in section 4.2.5 -- the canon
example {naDev puqpu' tu'lu'} contradicts your interpretation. It
*acts like* passive voice in English, but it isn't quite the same.
-- ghunchu'wI' batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj