tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Nov 25 14:54:36 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: understanding {-lu'}
- From: Marian Schwartz <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: understanding {-lu'}
- Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 17:52:11 -0500
ghItlh SuStel
>At the very least, "passive" is the wrong word to describe {-lu'}
>formations. "Passive" implies inactivity or acquiescence, but all the
>Klingon suffix is doing is telling you that there's no specific subject to
>worry about. That's not weak, that's just a fact.
Ah. In Ferengi (which I study a bit on the side... please don't kill me!)
there is definitely a passive, but they don't use the simple "subject" and
"object." They use "agent" and "patient." This is a different way to
describe grammar in English as well. The agent of the sentence is the one
that does the action, whether or not it is the "doer" of the verb, so it
applies to the subject and the "by" clause in a passive sentence. The
"patient" is the one that is acted upon, whether or not it is the object of
a verb. It can be the subject of a passive sentence. Just a little
addendum.
(I agree with SuStel... whether or not {-lu'} is passive is pretty much
irrelevant.)
Qapla'
qoror