tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Feb 22 23:03:43 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: agentive -wI'
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: agentive -wI'
- Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 23:03:33 EST
ghunchu'wI' wrote:
>The single point I'd like to make here is that "verbs with {-wI'}" are
>NOUNS. Nouns don't take verb prefixes.
How about verb suffixes? There's ghojmoHwI'...
>The expected response is that the verb prefix can be there *before* the
>{-wI'} is applied. It's a valid counterpoint, but it has ZERO support in
>canon.
If I were to try to find support for using prefixes with {-wI'}, that is the
argument I would use, because in canon usage, suffixes are put on verbs, and
then wI' is added.
Of course, a suffix is not a prefix, and I'm not really making that
argument.... Just mentioning it. If Okrand someday says that suffixes are
okay with wI', I think I'd understand the basis for the decision.
-Sengval