tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Mar 30 13:50:28 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Qapbe' DujwIj
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Qapbe' DujwIj
- Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 16:50:17 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
- Priority: NORMAL
On Tue, 30 Mar 1999 13:46:01 -0800 (PST) [email protected]
wrote:
> In a message dated 3/28/1999 9:23:04 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
> [email protected] writes:
>
> << bItamtaHvIS qab QInmey law' lutu'lu'. Holna' jatlhlu'chu' 'e'
> leghDI' latlhpu' Holmaj yajchoH. mughojmoH Qanqor. lutmeyDaj
> QInmeyDaj je potlh law' paQDI'norghDaj potlh puS. >>
> ===================
> I also argued that I do not think {mughojmoH Qanqor} works. But, no one has
> told me why he thinks it does work. My opinion is that: we teach a subject,
> not a person. Obviously, the prefix {mu-} indicates a person.
>
> I would have said: {jIHvaD ghojmoH Qanqor}.
>
> Still open to comments and opinions.
>
> peHruS
Prefix shortcut to the indirect object. Krankor teaches me it.
charghwI' 'utlh