tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jul 30 09:51:09 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: -lu' and -be', small aside on Paul Simon
From: "Stephan Schneider" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> 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).