tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jul 30 02:35:12 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
lu' misused as passivizer
- From: "A.Appleyard" <[email protected]>
- Subject: lu' misused as passivizer
- Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 10:34:17 GMT
- Organization: Materials Science Centre
- Priority: normal
"Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]> wrote:-
> This deserves comment, and in DIvI' Hol for clarity. [[email protected]
> was] trying to use "*ghunlu'wI'" for "programs" working on "thing which is
> programmed." I don't believe you can do that. This is part of the problem
> with thinking of "-lu'" as a passivizer. It isn't. ...
He wasn't the first to be so confused! Long ago as the Indo-European languages
developed, Celtic (then spoken in much of central Europe) developed a verb
form {-r}, meaning the same as Klingon {-lu'}. The same suffix got into early
Latin, which used it as a passivizer, e.g. {amat} -> {amatur}. But it would be
useful to put *{-lu'wI'} in a list of suggestions and queries for Marc Okrand.