tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Dec 06 14:58:22 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: understanding {-moH}
- From: Qov <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: understanding {-moH}
- Date: Sat, 06 Dec 1997 14:58:16 -0800
At 09:49 97-12-03 -0800, ghunchu'wI' wrote:
}[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}.
majQa'. jIbel.
Qov [email protected]
Beginners' Grammarian