tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Oct 20 09:59:30 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
SuvwI' quvHa'
- From: Robyn Stewart <[email protected]>
- Subject: SuvwI' quvHa'
- Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 09:55:30 -0700
qatlh muj mu'tlheghvam? :
SuvwI' quvHa' wIlegh
* * *
wotvaD mojaqvetlh wIlo' net tuchlaw'. "If a Type 5 noun suffix is used, it
follows the verb, which, when used to modify the noun in this way
[adjectively] can have no other suffix except the rover qu'." (TKD p. 50)
pIj DIp tlha'bogh wot'e' vIlo'taHvIS, -be' -Ha' je vIlo' jIH. jImujlaw'.
not QaghHeyvammo' vIlughmoHlu'pu'. Qaghvam HIvlu' not 'e' vIlegh. pabvam
lo'law' nuv law'. Okrandvo' chutvam tlhochbogh chovnatlh'e' wIghaj'a'?
SKI: TKD seems to forbid even -Ha' and -be' from appearing on verbs used
adjectivally. Is there canon to contradict this rule?
---
Robyn Stewart [email protected] tlhIngan Hol ngotlhchu'wI'