tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Nov 14 10:09:30 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Type 7 suffix and {-jaj}
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Type 7 suffix and {-jaj}
- Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 13:07:00 -0500
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
Date: Friday, November 14, 1997 11:36 AM
Subject: Re: Type 7 suffix and {-jaj}
>In einer eMail vom 14.11.97 16:37:25 MEZ, ghItlh SuStel:
>> If verbs with {-jaj} never take an aspect suffix (TKD pp. 175-6), how
come
>> we can say {wo' DevtaHjaj ghawran} (KGT p. 26)?
>
>I understand
>{Devjaj} - "may he lead"
>{DevtaHjaj} - "may he be leading", "may he always lead"
>
>Perhabs this was another error MO did, maybe he meant that it doesn't make
>sense to say "may you have scared your enemies". And then he forget that it
>does make sense to say "may you be <verb>ing"...(??)
yuQDaq jISaqDI" jagh Duj DaQaw'ta'jaj
When I land on the planet, I hope that you will have destroyed the enemy
ship.
It makes sense, but it's apparently forbidden. I don't yet see any reason
that Type 7 suffixes shouldn't be allowed other than "that's just the way it
is."
>another example:
>{taHjaj boq} (TKD p. 173)
This isn't the same thing. Here, {taH} is a verb, not a suffix.
SuStel
Stardate 97872.0