tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Dec 30 12:24:40 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: KLBC:suffixes

>> >> SoH DuyepHa''a' QeH'a'li'?
>> >>         Does your wrath make you careless?
>>    SoH DuyepHa''a'mo' QeH'a'lIj?        
>
>Think {-moH}, not {-mo'}.

        SoH DuyepHa''a'moH QeH'a'lIj?
                
                So {-moH} and {-mo'} are not really equivalent? Then does
                {-moH} mean "to bring about the action of the verb," and
                {-mo'} mean "caused by the nature of the verb's action?"
         

> 
>> >> chaH nuchmo' vImuSmo'
>> >>         Since he is a coward, I hate him.
>>    ghaH nuchmo' vImuS
> 
>This one is easy to get confused about. We say {tlhIngan maH}. 
>We don't say {maH tlhIngan}. So, you don't say {ghaH nuchmo'}. 
>And before you make a wild stab at it, consider which word 
>deserves {-mo'}. You want to say, "because he is a coward, I 
>hate him." You don't want to say "Because of a coward, I hate 
>him."
        
        nuch ghaHmo' vImuS
                coward (equals) him (and as a result) I hate him        
        [or]

        nuchmo' ghaH vImuS        
                as a consequence of being a coward (which nature is 
                assigned to) him, I/him hate

        So {nuch} and {ghaH} are in apposition, thus equivalent, and
        the 'cowardice' I'm hating is the result of "him" and
        "coward" being equivalent? Or, in more wooden terms, He is
        a coward (and) because of that, I hate him?

        chasm

Back to archive top level