tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Nov 17 15:02:56 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: priceless (was: Re: KLBC: names)
ja' "Anthony.Appleyard" <[email protected]>:
> This thread seems to have amalgamated with the current <ghunlu'wI'> thread
>about whether or not {-lu'} is enough like a passivizer to divert the {-wI'}
>from subject to object, same as {-lu'} makes the pronoun prefix agreement
>treat the object as the subject.
qatlh juja'nIS? ngoDvam wItu'laH je maH...
pagh Dachelpu'. ghu' DaDelpu' neH.
'ej bItu'Ha'. jumuvqa'pa', qechvam qelpu' tlhegh.
DaDelHa'law' je. jIQIjchu'meH, DIvI' Hol vIlo':
Using the verb prefixes differently doesn't automatically imply that {-lu'}
treats the object like the subject.
SKI: Duh... ;-)
-- ghunchu'wI'