tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Nov 27 21:49:48 2009

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: Checking understanding of -be'

ghunchu'wI' 'utlh (

On Nov 27, 2009, at 8:42 PM, "Seruq" <> wrote:

>>>>> Is this "correct" use of <-be'>?
> That's how I've always used it.
> -be'lu', one does not V
> -lu'be', not one does V

I concur. This is a logical way to think of it.

Canon does not always support the logical conclusion, however. I can't  
think of any examples that confirm this use of a negated {-lu'}.

-- ghunchu'wI

Back to archive top level