tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Apr 14 21:20:47 2014
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Multiple verb suffixes
Having met 'eD and recalling one of his weaknesses, I suspect that he didn't
intentially misorder the suffices, that he wasn't actually proposing the
suffixes be ordered incorrectly, just trying to recall a sentence like:
DuHeghrupmoHlaH vs. DuHeghmoHlaH
To my reading -laH acts slightly differently in the two constructions, but I
won't give my interpretation so I don't bias yours.
- Qov
-----Original Message-----
From: ghunchu'wI' [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: April 14, 2014 21:01
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Multiple verb suffixes
On Apr 14, 2014, at 11:14 PM, "Bellerophon, modeler"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> 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.
>
> It seems like the combined action of multiple suffixes would be an
important grammatical rule, though I have never seen one stated.
Power Klingon's suggested formula for declining an offered liaison:
DaH jIbwIj vISay'nISmoH
"I must wash my hair now."
Suffixes come in a specific order. That order does not always lend itself to
translation in that rigid order.
-- ghunchu'wI'
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
![[KLI Member]](/pics/KLImemberbutton.gif "[KLI Member]"){kind=small}
![[Hol po'wI']](/pics/level3_big.png "[Hol po'wI']"){kind=small}