tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Jul 11 04:30:24 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

• Index by Date
• Index by Thread
• Index by Author

Re: moHaq nap, moHaq Qatlh ghap

MorphemeAddict ([email protected])

• From: [email protected]
• Subject: Re: moHaq nap, moHaq Qatlh ghap
• Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 07:29:13 EDT

In a message dated 2004-07-10 10:01:51 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
[email protected] writes:

> ja' lay'tel SIvten:
> >Have any of these verbs been used in canon with a no-object prefix (moHaq
> >nap)?
> 
> per vIyajchu'be'.  chay' moHaqmey Daqelbogh nap law' latlh nap puS?
> 
> chovnatlhmey vIqaw:
> 
> >buS
> 
> CK: {yIqIm! yIbuS} "Pay attention and concentrate."
> 
> >DIl
> 
> CK: {DaH yIDIl} "Pay now."
> 
> >moH
> 
> TKD UKE: bImoHqu' "You look terrible. (i.e., You're very ugly.)"
> 
> -- ghunchu'wI'
> 
I used 'simple prefix' for no-object, and 'complex prefix' for 'with object'. 
 I didn't include {yI-} because it's ambiguous.  The only prefixes that I 
considered were {jI-}, {ma-}, {bI-}, {Su-}, and {pe-}.  

{moH} (be ugly) without an object is explicitly different from {moH} (exert 
influence on) with an object.  So it doesn't count either.

lay'tel SIvten

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: moHaq nap, moHaq Qatlh ghap
    • From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Klingon WOTD: qum (v)
• Next by Date: (no subject)
• Previous by thread: Re: moHaq nap, moHaq Qatlh ghap
• Next by thread: Re: moHaq nap, moHaq Qatlh ghap
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level