Re: VS1, VS4, VS5

[Marc Ruehlaender <ruehli@iastate.edu>]

> > <S>vaD <O> qIpmoHlu'.  One makes <S> hit <O>.
> > <O> qIpmoHlu' <C>.     <C> makes one hit <O>.
> 
mujang charghwI', ja':

> This one REALLY bothers me, though I suspect you may be right. I 
> just have never seen a subject to the left of {-lu'} before and 
> it gives me the willies to see that happen.
> 
wa' DoS wIqIp.
as I said, it was more of a technical point. 

> I see how you got to it, and as I said, you may very well be 
> right. Meanwhile, we have only one canon example that included 
> both {-moH} and {-lu'} and it is as weird as your example, but 
> quite different from it:
> 
> HeghqangmoHlu'pu' - it made him/her willing to die
> 
> TKD page 45.
> 
well, the most important difference I see, is that Hegh doesn't
allow anything in the <O> position, and therefore you get

<S> HeghmoHlu'. One causes <S> to die.
HeghmoHlu' <C>. <C> causes one to die.

> I can only say that I have not met a {-moHlu'} that I liked.
>  
in this special case (Hegh), I think it's worth noting that
"HeghmoH <C>" seems to carry the meaning I assigned to "HeghmoHlu' 
<C>". According to TKD p. 88, "HeghmoH <C>" means "<C> is fatal".
Not that that would clear up anything... 

but it might serve as an indication that -moHlu' is avoided
in favor of an unspecified object. ("<S> HeghmoH <C>" would
mean "<C> is fatal for <S>" or "<C> causes <S> to die".)

thus, in order to say - if you had to - "<C> makes one hit <O>",
"<O> qIpmoH <C>" might be a way to do it.

                                           Marc Ruehlaender
                                           aka HomDoq
                                           ruehli@iastate.edu