Re: chenmoH/mojmoH (was Re: Klingon WOTD: cho' (verb))

[MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com]

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 11/4/2005 7:59:55 PM Central Standard Time, 
qeslagh@hotmail.com writes:


> Really, the English "become" has two senses: the intransitive, non-copular 
> sense meaning "to come into existence", and the transitive, copular sense 
> meaning, well, "to become" or "to begin to be". If Klingon {moj} could refer 
> to the first sense, then yes, I guess {chenmoH} and {mojmoH} would be 
> synonyms, but as Voragh has shown, {moj} in Klingon has never been used in 
> anything other than a transitive sense. 

In English "become" is not transitive, although it is copular.  What is the 
difference between "come into existence" and "begin to be"?  They seem 
virtually the same to me.

Of course, Klingon "moj" is transitive, because it takes objects.

lay'tel SIvten