tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Feb 11 05:15:16 2010

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: suffixes -lu'wI'

David Trimboli ([email protected]) [KLI Member] [Hol po'wI']

On 2/11/2010 8:03 AM, André Müller wrote:
> Dear all, I always wondered how best to translate the word
> "question". So far I always rephrased the sentence to avoid
> constructing a lengthy nominal phrase involving the verbs {tlhob} or
> {ghel} (both mean "to ask").

There's your problem right there. Don't construct a lengthy nominal
phrase. Rephrase with a simple verb.

> Now, while looking through {ghIlghameS} I had an idea: As {-lu'}
> means more or less "someone verbs" (with a change of A and P for the
> pronominal prefixes), and {-wI'} means "someone who does" OR
> "something which does", is it possible to create a patient
> nominalization with {-lu'wI'}?
>
> So, does {tlhoblu'wI'} mean "that which is asked" (i.e. the question
> or request)? I think, the word I found in {ghIlghameS} was something
> like {leghbe'lu'wI'} = "the unseen", but I don't quite remember.
>
> Are such forms grammatical? Do we even have canon examples for this?
> Do you think it's a nice way to say "question" or "request"?

This is an old chestnut, and you won't find a consensus here. For my 
money, this is not valid. {-wI'} nominalizes the verb into the subject, 
but {-lu'} means the verb has no subject. The two are mutually incompatible.

-- 
SuStel
http://www.trimboli.name/

Back to archive top level