tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jun 08 08:19:59 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: Q on {-meH}
According to [email protected]:
...
> _I_ don't call it an infinitive, that was charghwI''s term. I'd call the
> {-meH} usage
> with a verb a dependent verb phrase, and the {-meH} verb with a noun I'd call
> a nominative (that is, something behaving like a noun, since it's part of a
> noun-noun
> phrase, but which is not in origin a noun). I would say that both forms use
> the {-meH} construction in the same way, in that they can take prefixes or
> subjects and objects as needed, and that the absence of a subject is to be
> interpreted as an impersonal subject.
The problem here is that you apparently think it is okay to use
this "impersonal subject" (mysteriously different from an
indefinite subject) with an explicit object. I don't. If you
have an object, you need an appropriate prefix or {-lu'}. If
you have neither a subject or object for the verb with {-meH},
then you can omit any prefix from the verb with {-meH}. Is this
making sense yet?
> -- ter'eS
charghwI'