tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Feb 24 04:35:18 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: agentive -wI'
>It's almost like . . . ahem . . . verbs with /-moH/ have a . . . cough,
>cough . . . status equal to that of . . . harumph . . . root verbs. Almost
>as if . . . ahem, cough . . . they're considered to be . . . cough . . .
>separate concepts . . . cough, harumph . . . .
If I remember correctly, MO stated in an interview with Will that Maltz had
heard <<quvmoHnIS>>, where the correct order would be expected to be
<<quvnISmoH>>. Is this further evidence for this type of usage? As well,
let's not forget that the suffix <<-moH>> is alone in its class, so it's
obviously got *something* that distinguishes it from other suffixes; perhaps
this very feature is what distinguishes it.
(Although this point actually makes the theory impossible, or nearly so, to
prove, since we have no counterexamples with any other suffixes of this
class. If you think my statement is a long stretch of the imagination,
please tell me why you think so, so that I can better formulate an idea of
what's happening with <<-moHwI>>.)
Qapla' 'ej Satlho'
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.