tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Feb 11 21:37:28 2010

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: suffixes -lu'wI'

ghunchu'wI' 'utlh ([email protected])



On Feb 11, 2010, at 8:20 PM, Andrà MÃller <[email protected]>  
wrote:

> If Okrand wouldn't have added
> the section you kindly cited some emails above, wouldn't it be  
> possible that
> {-lu'} verbs just cause a weird change in word order? Do you see any
> evidence which would falsify this possible/theoretical analysis?

The verb suffix {-lu'} is defined as meaning "indefinite subject".  
That seems like conclusive evidence that a noun preceding the verb  
bearing {-lu'} is not the subject. The word order is standard. It is  
merely the verb prefix that changes from its usual interpretation.

If you need a reason for *why* the prefix is weird, I think it's  
because verb prefixes always carry the idea of a subject. Something  
has to be done differently when no subject is to be implied. It could  
have been done with the no-object prefixes instead of the third-person  
singular object ones...or it could have been done in a number of other  
ways. Whatever the reason for the specific prefixes used, I think it's  
clear that the object remains the object if {-lu'} is present.

-- ghunchu'wI' 





Back to archive top level