tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jun 09 09:39:37 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: Q on {-meH}
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC: Q on {-meH}
- Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 19:13:50 -0400
From: William H. Martin <[email protected]>
>The problem here is that you apparently think it is okay to use
>this "impersonal subject" (mysteriously different from an
>indefinite subject) with an explicit object. I don't. If you
>have an object, you need an appropriate prefix or {-lu'}. If
>you have neither a subject or object for the verb with {-meH},
>then you can omit any prefix from the verb with {-meH}. Is this
>making sense yet?
I think the idea has merit. For purposes of illustration, it would make
{SuvwI' DevmeH paq} into
SuvwI' [DevmeH paq]
a warrior's book-for-leading
instead of
[SuvwI' DevmeH] paq
book-for-leading-a-warrior.
Yech, talking about these subtleties in e-mail is getting really annoying.
I could explain it all so much easier in person!
SuStel
Stardate 98436.6