tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Feb 24 04:35:18 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: agentive -wI'

jatlh SuStel:

>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.

Back to archive top level