tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Feb 22 16:54:43 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: agentive -wI'

Lawrence wrote:
>tagha' bI'ang'egh choHoHwI'wI'. jIHeghlI' 'a HIvje'lIj tar vIlanta'. ghIq
>qaHoHwI'lI' jIH.
>Finally the "you-kill-me"-er reveals himself. I am dying, but I put poison
>in your glass. Thus, I am your "I-kill-you"-er.

Will wrote (not in direct response):
>A {bomwI'} is a singer. Not a song singer. That would be a {bom bomwI'}. 
>One who conquers it/him/her/them would be {'oH/ghaH/ghaH/chaH charghwI'}.

Then would you say this is correct:

tagha' 'ang'egh jIH HoHwI'.

Finally, he who kills me reveals himself.

If it isn't correct, why not?  If {HoHwI'} can have a third-person object, as 
it apparently can, why not first or second person?

And if it is correct, why?  Why not {jIH muHoHwI'} or just {muHoHwI'}?  
Wouldn't those be the same thing?

I hope this isn't taken as confrontational or stupid.  This debate is going 
over my head somewhat; I'm just trying to figure it out.


Back to archive top level