tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon May 26 20:18:08 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: Sentence really as object



ja' charghwI':
>Or what if {neH} is caught in an evolution between being the
>second verb of a Sentence As Object construction and becoming a
>verb suffix. It's function nearly fits {-qang}, except that for
>its full versatility, the person doing the wanting needs to be
>independently specified from the subject of the first verb.

I've thought of it this way as well.  We've got a similar situation
with the "in-sentence" usage of {qar'a'} as described by TKD p.179,
where it seems to be migrating toward being a verb suffix.  Maybe
the "totally complete" meaning of {rIntaH} might someday move into
a similar "after-the-verb" location.

But, as you point out, {neH} needs its own object separate from the
other verb in order to be completely useful.  As a true verb suffix,
it would always have to mean "want to do" something, like the way
{-vIp} always means "afraid to do" something.

-- ghunchu'wI'




Back to archive top level