tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Apr 14 20:14:44 2014
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Tlhingan-hol] Multiple verb suffixes
- From: "Bellerophon, modeler" <[email protected]>
- Subject: [Tlhingan-hol] Multiple verb suffixes
- Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 23:14:24 -0400
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=avxoFtEQn6PM/1Kg4j9sB1sG2s2n/pW52Jf3xI0BDEk=; b=HNdy2SlYuh3gCDIv84TLRrt55S/gV7aNGWhRXBtOLCIUaP97HitwjzDBHmj9trnoNr +2Wdp+7iNPxmtjXXHAmE6U4e1xkc09mfUQXh6Kfn8ReqoDNK9SzxB67PV/MG9jIbvorq BoNUc5oeI3vPLCRRVDoRGkogUbiYFacarq+X4FkPOKkFTHy3QbbX6+PJZ6KLIg2kPOGR I7jBt2VmxP2Lgo5CKWOpgB0DKbQrSckyYQUKlh63LHYOho6uUktvy6rOZViGjKiNcYRn rd3BCCbolYN4MRZ06BoT5bcxjucjP9jJW3vBqQpO5fMPqhx8KKacdkRLheA5FX8GNjlZ maWA==
- List-archive: <http://mail.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/>
- List-id: <tlhingan-hol.kli.org>
- List-subscribe: <http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol>, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=subscribe>
<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 9:26 PM, De'vID <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:[email protected]"; target="_blank">[email protected]</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><p dir="ltr">Q: ghorgh tujchoHpu' bIQ?<br></p><p dir="ltr">
A: bIDachtaHvIS, tujchoHpu' bIQ.</p></blockquote><div>I take it you would interpret {tujchoHpu'} as something like "finish becoming hot." Why not just {tujchoH}, as SuStel asked? Because water becomes hot gradually? Certainly not because you need {-pu'} for grammatical tense! I'd think the change of state might be considered perfective in its own right, or have continuous and perfective aspects, depending on whether the process is of interest to the speaker and the listener, as it might be if the kettle was taking too long to boil. Also possible then would be {tujchoHtaH bIQ}.</div>
<div><br></div><div>This means the Type 7 suffix acts not on the root, but on the root + Type 3 suffix as a whole. It strongly implies some kind of grammatical "chain rule;" that each suffix modifies the totality of what precedes it, like so:</div>
<div><br></div><div>[...(((prefix+verb+suffix)+suffix)+suffix)+...]</div><div><br></div><div>Type 8 would be an exception; it's merely like saying "Sir" at the appropriate time. But rovers clearly modify what comes before them.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I wish now I could remember the example someone on this list cited, in which they interpreted a suffix as applying to the verb + the following suffix. It seems like it was something along the lines of {lo'moHlaH}, interpreted as "make usable" instead of "can cause to use." At the time I had no more reason to question this interpretation than a vague feeling.</div>
<div><br></div></div><div>It seems like the combined action of multiple suffixes would be an important grammatical rule, though I have never seen one stated.</div><div><br></div><div>~'eD</div>-- <br>My modeling blog: <a href="http://bellerophon-modeler.blogspot.com/"; target="_blank">http://bellerophon-modeler.blogspot.com/</a><br>
My other modeling blog: <a href="http://bellerophon.blog.com/"; target="_blank">http://bellerophon.blog.com/</a><br>
</div></div>
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol