tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Sep 15 21:58:40 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Ke'Plak
In a message dated 98-09-13 15:26:59 EDT, ghunchu'wI' writes:
<< bIlughbe', peHruS. chay' {lughoDlu'bogh} DalaDHa'ta'?
Look again -- there is no inconsistency here. The prefix {lu-} on the
word {lughoDlu'bogh} says that the object {to'baj 'uS} is plural, not
singular.
-- ghunchu'wI' >>
I far prefer Voragh's explanation that the suffix {-lu'} reverses the
plurality to the subject, indicated as plural by the prefix {lu-}.
As to you statement that the prefix {lu-} says that the object is plural, I
must strongly disagree. This prefix indicates that a plural subject acts on a
singular object.
peHruS