tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue May 19 12:09:03 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: Quj bej Holtej qorDu'
> > of any other verb that does this, except perhaps for the {lo'}
> > and {lo'laH} split, which is resolved by calling {lo'laH} a
> > separate, independant verb.
>
> which reminds me of another question I had: doesn't this make
> {lo'laHghach} a verb+{-ghach} without any intervening suffix?
> wouldn't it be better to say there are two verbs {lo'}, one
> meaning "uses" and the other meaning "is used"? then {lo'laH}
> can be analysed as "can be used" = "is useful" = "is valuable"
Well, /lo'laHghach/ has two interpretations.
1. V + laH + ghach "ability to use"
2. V + ghach (marked) "valuation" (?)
"Is used" isn't stative, it's passive. (Unless it means "previously owned",
which is a different story). "X can be used" would be /X lo'laH vay'/
(since we can't use /-lu'/.)
> Marc Ruehlaender
--Holtej