tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Dec 03 09:35:12 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

• Index by Date
• Index by Thread
• Index by Author

Re: understanding {-moH}

• From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
• Subject: Re: understanding {-moH}
• Date: Wed, 3 Dec 97 12:05:34 EST
• Cc: [email protected]

[regarding {jInguvmoH}, {jIghojmoH}, etc.]

ja' charghwI':
>...We have examples in canon of {jISop} and other
>transitive verb roots with intransitive prefixes, but we have no
>examples of an intransitive prefix on a verb with {-moH}. None.
>Zero. pagh. Zed. Zilch. Nada.

Retyping pages of text to make "quick reference" documents pays off --
I found such an example.

The Klingon Way, page 196:  

    SeymoH QeH.
  "Anger excites."

This is *exactly* the way I was using {tlhuHmoH} when this particular 
debate broke out.  The Klingon is ambiguous, as the null prefix could
be interpreted as implying a third-person object, but the translation
makes it clear that there isn't one.  {SeymoH} "excites" obviously is
being used intransitively.  It works just like {jISop}.

Sorry, Charlie.  I mean, charghwI'. :-)

-- ghunchu'wI'

(DachlI'mo' charghwI' ghaHvaD jabbI'IDvam vIlab je.
charghwI', bItaHmeH Dutlhejjaj vajna' qa'.)

• Prev by Date: Re: [proposal] translation for directions.
• Next by Date: Re: lu- (KLBC)
• Prev by thread: Re: The Klingon Postal Course
• Next by thread: Re: understanding {-moH}
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level