tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Nov 27 05:53:45 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: understanding {-lu'}
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: understanding {-lu'}
- Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 08:53:33 -0500 (EST)
In a message dated 97-11-25 01:34:30 EST, Qov gives us:
<<
The rebels were killed by the loyalists. (passive)
The loyalists killed the rebels. (active)
In Klingon:
matlhwI'pu'mo' lotlhwI'pu' luHoHlu'
lotlhwI'pu' HoH matlhwI'pu' >>
----------------------peHruS------------------------------------------------
Thinking about Klingon's {-lu'} suffix vis-a-vis English's passive voice, I
need to read TKD more and find canon examples. But, until I can find more
evidence to support Qov's supposition, I cannot agree that a {-mo'} clause is
equivalent to an English "by" clause. So, this still does not convince me
that the {-lu'} suffix is equivalent to passive voice.
First, TKD describes the {-lu'} suffix as indicating an indefinite suffix.
Now Qov is trying to tell us who is that subject without actually placing
that "who" in the position of the subject in the Klingon sentence. English
virtually does this, using the "by whom" construction. I "feel" (not good
enough, I know) that Klingon is different.
peHruS