tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Sep 23 07:45:51 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: ja'chuq explained (was: chetvI' yIHuvmoH)
- From: Steven Boozer <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: ja'chuq explained (was: chetvI' yIHuvmoH)
- Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 09:44:37 -0500 (CDT)
: ja' charghwI':
: >Did I miss something? I don't remember {ja'chuq} getting
: >explained. I remember {lo'laH} being explained, but not
: >{ja'chuq}. Please enlighten me.
:
: I began this thread with a quote from page 65 of TKD:
:
: (The verb is made up of {ja'} "tell", {-chuq} "each other";
: thus {ja'chuq} is "tell each other".)
:
: -- ghunchu'wI'
On the Expert Forum Okrand was asked about those suffixed verbs ({-moH} and
{-laH}) in TKD's glossary. He addressed most of the points -- basically,
that except for {lo'laH} they're not indivisable verbs but verb + suffix and
he listed them separately for the convenience of the average non-linguist
user -- but said he wanted to discuss {ja'chuq} (!) in a subsequent post.
To date, we're still waiting. Now that I think about it, this may have been
a joke.
Voragh
_____________________________________________________________________
Steven Boozer University of Chicago Library [email protected]