tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Jul 28 11:27:34 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

• Index by Date
• Index by Thread
• Index by Author

RE: KLBC: -lu' and -be', small aside on Paul Simon

• From: "DloraH" <[email protected]>
• Subject: RE: KLBC: -lu' and -be', small aside on Paul Simon
• Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 12:26:00 -0400
• Importance: Normal
• In-Reply-To: <LJIC1ZEBQK1YPOI3YUQQLVPKKGX2X.3d43fa58@kabuterimon>

> Can -lu' and -be' be used as -lu'be' to imply that there is no
> subject for a particular action, or that nobody
> does it? Perhaps an example will explain what I mean:
> *Paul Simon* Sovlu'be'. noybe'.
> No-one knows Paul Simon. He is not famous.
>
> noy *Paul Simon*. 'ach Sovbe'lu'.
> Paul Simon is famous. Even so, some people do not know him.
>
> Is this usage possible? DuH'a' mu'tlheghmeyvam?

As far as I know MO has not explicitly explained this, but what we know of
suffix order, I agree with this.  This is how I have been using it.


> qu'qu' 'oH.
> It was most wonderful.

We do have a word for "wonderful" (Dun); qu' is understandable tho.


DloraH, BG

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: -lu' and -be', small aside on Paul Simon
    • From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>

• References:
  • KLBC: -lu' and -be', small aside on Paul Simon
    • From: "Sulu' wa'" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Wales-vo' jIcheghpu'
• Next by Date: RE: Wales-vo' jIcheghpu'
• Prev by thread: KLBC: -lu' and -be', small aside on Paul Simon
• Next by thread: Re: -lu' and -be', small aside on Paul Simon
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level