tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun May 05 05:19:58 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: -lu' with explicit objects



[snip]

>>   batlh Daqawlu'taH SoH
>>      and not
>>   batlh SoH Daqawlu'taH
>> Agreed?

> Disagreed.
>
> The -lu' suffix indicates that the SUBJECT of the verb is indefinite.  The
> flip-flopping of the prefixes notwithstanding, the object of the verb
> remains teh OBJECT and nothing else.  Its position does not change.

[snip]

> Why should it matter if the object is third-person or second-person?  It
> should remain where objects belong: before the verb, like Kahless
> intended.  I have not seen ANY evidence, even recognized mistakes, that
> would support putting the object of a -lu' sentence after the verb.

Actually, I was contemplating this concept over my two week h'day from uni.
In my tlhIngan helper at the moment, it assumes that it appears in the position
of the subject. This is promptly being fixed.

>~mark

Ford

PS Don't expect anything at all too soon. I am still trying to work on my
own web page...


      _   /  _   /  _   /  /  ____/  Ford Prefect   aka  Daniel Noll
     /   /  /   /  /   /  /  /
    ____/  _   /  /   /  /  /             [email protected]
 __/    __/ __/__/ __/__/______/      [email protected]




Back to archive top level