tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Nov 17 08:16:41 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: The fire is lit (was: <K'>vaD ghItlhlu''a'?)
- From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
- Subject: Re: The fire is lit (was: <K'>vaD ghItlhlu''a'?)
- Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 11:16:39 -0500
SuStelvo':
>qul chenmoHlu'ta'
>The fire has been started.
I agree with charghwI''s evaluation of the suffix combination {-moHlu'}
here; they effectively cancel one another out. I'd have said this as:
{chenpu' qul} "the fire has taken form".
>qul taghlu'ta'
>Someone has initiated the fire.
We've got canon for using {tagh} intransitively as well: {taghpu' qul}
would work.
>meQchoHpu' qul
>The fire has begun to burn. (I used {-pu'} instead of {-ta'} because a fire
>doesn't start intentionally.)
Ah, my suggestions both lose the "successfully accomplished" implication.
-- ghunchu'wI'