tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jan 27 19:33:45 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: Two IFs on one THEN?
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: KLBC: Two IFs on one THEN?
- Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 22:13:52 EST
In a message dated 1/27/1999 12:04:51 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:
<< Oops. Suddenly, I am knocked down by a sudden gust of memory.
{Sumchuq X Y je} would NOT work because {Sum} can ONLY be
intransitive. It is a verb that can be used adjectivally, so it
can never take an object. The {-chuq} suffix, despite its
verb's prefix indicating differently, always implies
transitivity.
I apologize for any confusion I may have caused by my eroneous
suggestion. >>
This is where I believe Klingon differs from English. In Klingon the suffix
-chuq does not imply transitivity after all. That is precisely why it takes
the "no object" pronominal prefixes.
Furthermore, if we look at Spanish, for example, -chuq would equate to the
"reflexive," still intransitive.
peHruS