Re: KLBC: Two IFs on one THEN?

[WestphalWz@aol.com]

In a message dated 1/27/1999 12:04:51 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
whm2m@server1.mail.virginia.edu 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