tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Apr 03 11:39:36 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: ghojmoH
- From: Steven Boozer <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: ghojmoH
- Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 13:39:11 -0600 (CST)
: Okrand has been very clear about this. Words like {ghojmoH}
: really are just {ghoj} plus {-moH} with a couple of exceptions.
: In fact, I think he has only given us one explicit exception.
: [...]
: The exception is {lo'laH}, which was turned into a single root
: verb so it can be used as an adjective. Normally a verb used as
: an adjective could not take the {-laH} suffix.
:
: charghwI'
Okrand discussed {lo'laH} on the old MSN Expert Forum (11/97):
It is a simple verb in its own right (though it's an unusual two-
syllable one), not the verb {lo'} "use" plus Type 5 suffix {-laH}
"can". It is likely that there is some sort of historical connection
to the verb + suffix form, but, if so, it is just that--historical."
> Words with -Ha' are not affected by the above postulation, but are they
> words in their own right too?
>
> qelayn
And he covers the wierdness of verbs + {-Ha'} in TKD p.47f, specifically:
"It is interesting that {-Ha'} always occurs right after the verb.
It is not known why Klingon grammarians insist on calling it a rover.
It was felt best not to argue with Klingon tradition, however, so
{-Ha'} is here classified as a rover."
Voragh