tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Apr 08 08:23:43 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: adjectives, ???

This is not quite right.  We've seen {-qu'}, {-be'}, and {-Ha'} on
adjectival verbs.

veng tInqu'Daq
In the very big city (The Klingon Dictionary, p. 50)

wa'maH yIHmey lI'be'
Ten useless tribbles  (Conversational Klingon, how to count)

Duj ngaDHa'
Unstable vessel (Klingon for the Galactic Traveler, p. 150)

Therefore, a more accurate description might be that when a verb is acting
adjectivally, it may only have rovers for suffixes (not counting the
migrating Type 5 noun suffix).

It might possibly be true that an adjectival verb can take any suffix which
doesn't change the verb's "quality" nature.  For instance, {tIn} means "be
big" and is a verb of quality.  {tInba'} means "obviously big," and is still
a verb of quality.  {tInchoH} means "become big," and no longer refers to
only a quality.

However, the above paragraph is merely speculation, and there are absolutely
no examples of anything other than a rover on an adjectivally-acting verb.

Stardate 99268.0

jatlh K'ryntes:
> Is the verb aspect suffix #6 allowed on an adjective, if there is no
> noun suffix #5 ?

ghobe'. Type 5 or -qu or both. Nothing else.

Back to archive top level