tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Oct 10 17:48:19 2004
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: -be'lu' vs. -lu'be'
Am Sun, 10 Oct 2004 17:36:18 -0400 hat ngabwI':
> FWIW, I personally don't like {tu'lu'be'}. It comes across, to me, as
> meaning something like "no one finds", which would be better expressed as
> {tu' pagh}.
Okay, my opinion, I believe that MO did a mistake there, possibly. But it
might be done on purpose also, I'm not sure, but I still see a difference
between those two version.
Other thing, {tu'lu'be'} looks like negating the "verb" {tu'lu'} which
means "there is".
tu'lu' + be' = "there is"+"not"
sounds a little worng I think, reminds me of {poSmoH}+{nIS}.
But it's still grammatical, so we must accept that ther *might* be a
difference.
try to search the archives, I asked about this topic some years ago
(between 1997 and 2001)
Quvar.
(too late to think more about this now. 'ej jIvumnIStaH - bwuark)