Re: -Daq

[Quvar valer <levinius@gmx.de>]

Am 26.10.2002 18:32:45, schrieb "DloraH" <DloraH@kli.org>:

>I am not disputing the definition of -Daq.  
Me neither. But there is a connection between -Daq and verbs of motion.

>-Daq can go on the direct
>object, but the prefix still needs to mark that word as the direct object if
>it is to be the destination.
Aha. {-Daq} is one of the few functions whose use I'm not very comfortable with yet. 

>Reference HolQeD Dec 1998, a clearification from MO written after TKD, TKW,
>and PK.
Interesting. I believe I have to spend some nights to read the past eight years of HolQeD, which I just 
received.

Quvar
Beginners' Grammarian
  ghojwI'pu'wI' vISaH