tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jun 18 10:03:26 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: ghuH

David Trimboli ([email protected])

• From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
• Subject: RE: ghuH
• Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 13:00:34 -0400
• Bcc:

>From: [email protected]
>[lay'tel SIvten's latest comments are preceded by "lS: ".]
>lay'SIv:
> >maghuH'a' maH?
>"Are *we* ready?"
>
>lay'SIv:
> >I used {ma-} on {ghuH} to specifically say no object.  Is that not valid?
>
>That was exactly my point:  I don't think we can use this verb without an
>object, expressed or not.

Sure we can.

[No-object prefixes]
     This set of prefixes is also used when an object is possible, but 
unknown or vague.  Thus, {jIyaj}
     "I understand" can be used when the speaker understands things in 
general, knows what is
     going on, or understands what another speaker has just said.  It 
cannot, however, be used for
     understanding a language or understanding a person.  Similarly, {maSop} 
"we eat" can be used
     to indicate a general act of eating, but not if a specific food is 
mentioned.
[TKD pp. 33-34]

{maghuH} "we are alerted (to things in general)," "we are alerted (to 
something not spelled out)"

SuStel
Stardate 4464.6

_________________________________________________________________
Get fast, reliable Internet access with MSN 9 Dial-up ? now 3 months FREE! 
http://join.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200361ave/direct/01/

• Prev by Date: moHaq nap, moHaq Qatlh ghap
• Next by Date: Re: [Marketing] "BBC News - Microsoft to launch in Kiswahili"
• Previous by thread: ghuH
• Next by thread: RE: ghuH
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level