tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Dec 07 11:45:32 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: Rules... Transitive vs Intransitive
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: Rules... Transitive vs Intransitive
- Date: Sat, 7 Dec 96 07:44:34 UT
On Friday, December 06, 1996 10:57 AM, jatlh qeyloS:
> This all started for me when SuStel said:
> >vay''e' muvmoHbogh ghob chevlaHbe' Hegh.
> >
> >Literally, it's "Death is not able to separate something which virtue
causes
> >to join." I'm not sure if {muv} is transitive or not. For a substitute,
you
> >might try
> >
> >vay'e' tay'moHbogh ghob chevlaHbe' Hegh.
Whoops. My mistake. It's still an uncertain word, but the problem is not
transitivity, it's a problem of exactly what the verb means. Is it "become
one with" or "cause more than one thing to become one"?
> Again, not being a smarta**, whether not {muv} is transitive or not means
> little if it DOES make sense. May it does being a grammarian but I don't
> want to add rules that don't exist. If that the way things really work like
> I said I'll live with it, maybe I'm being too simple but I do like
> simplicity after all.
But it *does* matter. There's quite a bit of difference between these two
concepts.
> Sustel please add your comments......
pItlh.
--
SuStel
Beginners' Grammarian
Stardate 96934.5