tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Aug 03 14:32:43 2004
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: -lu' with type 2 verbal suffixes?
On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 [email protected] wrote:
> HurghtaHvIS DuQlu'chugh, jagh jup je DuQvIpbe'lu'ba'
To me this parses as, "If one stabs while it's dark, one is obviously not
afraid to stab friend and foe."
I don't see /-vIp/ being applied to the object in this case.
> }. In this example the {-vIp} seems to refer to the {jagh jup je},
> which is the object of the verb. I think the intent is "If (some)one
> stabs while it's dark, (then) enemy and friend are obviously not afraid
> of being stabbed", i.e., the enemy and friend are in no danger from the
My question would be, why do you think the intent is anything other than
what is written? I think it makes a lot more sense to say "If one stabs
in the dark, one is not afraid of stabbing friend as well as foe".
> I found four examples in canon of {-lu'} with a VS2.
All of them show no indication that the object of the verb has changed in
any way, EXCEPT for the case where the Type 4 suffix /-moH/ is included,
but that explicitly indicates the subject and object roles are changed.
> As for how to say "I am not afraid of being stabbed", perhaps {muDuQ 'e'
> vISIQvIpbe'} ("I am not afraid to endure him stabbing me") is good enough.
I would go with /-lu'/ on /muDuQ/. "I am not afraid to endure one
stabbing me".
> Applied to the original situation, {jagh jup je DuQvIpbe'lu'ba'} would become
> {luDuQlu' 'e' luSIQvIpbe'ba' jagh jup je}.
I still question why you think this should be changed. Your result is now
"friend and foe are obviously not afraid to endure one stabbing them". I
don't think this is at all what the original quote intended, but if that's
what you're looking for, I think it's correct.
...Paul
** Have a question that reality just can't answer? **
** Visit Project Galactic Guide http://www.galactic-guide.com/ **
"Where are we going, and why am I in this handbasket?"