tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Jan 30 21:41:44 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: KLBC: Two IFs on one THEN?

ja' ter'eS:
>I understand now that you were saying "...always implies the transitivity
>of the original verb", but it sure looked like you were saying that
>/-chuq/ formed a transitive verb which nevertheless has a 'no object' verb

That's what I thought charghwI' was saying too.  I happen to agree with
that interpretation.  The {-chuq} *does* mean the verb has an object.
The object shares the subject slot in the sentence, but it is still the
recipient of the action.  In Klingon grammar this is shown by a plural
subject, a "no object" prefix, and a {-chuq} suffix.  But it's still a
transitive usage.

I see {-'egh} working almost exactly the same way, except the subject
and object are the same thing.

-- ghunchu'wI'

Back to archive top level