tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Jan 15 07:31:57 2006

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: transitivity

MorphemeAddict ([email protected])

• From: [email protected]
• Subject: Re: transitivity
• Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 10:31:44 EST

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 1/15/2006 9:02:39 AM Central Standard Time, 
[email protected] writes:


> ja' lay'tel SIvten:
> 
> > [email protected] writes:
> >
> >> Like {Qong}, for instance. We just don't have any nouns that could  
> >> possibly
> >> come after {Qong}.
> >
> > yInwIj naQ vIQongtaH.
> 
> What is that supposed to mean?  "I slept my unbroken life" makes no  
> sense to me, even if I accept that it's possible for something to "be  
> slept".
> 
Are you paraphrasing {naQ} 'be full, whole, entire, complete' as 'unbroken'?

"I'm sleeping my whole life" 'e' vIHech.

> However, TKD uses {Qong} as its example of a verb which does not use  
> the "has an object" prefixes.
> 
> -- ghunchu'wI'
> 
lay'tel SIvten

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: transitivity
    • From: "DloraH" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: easy question
• Next by Date: RE: transitivity
• Previous by thread: Re: transitivity
• Next by thread: RE: transitivity
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level