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

["David Trimboli" <SuStel@hotmail.com>]

From: "Stephan Schneider" <sts@stephan-schneider.net>
> then maybe something different makes sense:
>
> <verb>lu'be' maybe doesn't mean <verb>(lu'be') but (<verb>lu')be'.

Right.  As I suggested, the scope of the negation is expanded.

> so /Sovbe'lu'/ means "one doesn't know him.
> and /Sovlu'be'/ means "it's not true that someone knows him"

I don't really see any semantic difference between these two.

> but i don't know whether /-be'/ can negate the whole word and not
> only the element that it follows.

We've seen some evidence that /-be'/ can negate things other than just the
immediately preceding element.  One of the prime examples is /batlh
bIHeghbe'/ "You will die without honor" (Power Klingon).

SuStel
Stardate 2578.0