tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jan 29 13:41:08 2010
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: choH vs. choHmoH
On 1/29/2010 4:24 PM, André Müller wrote:
> 2010/1/29 David Trimboli<[email protected]>
>>
>> If the interpretation were correct, it would look like this:
>>
>> He yIchoH
>> Change the course!
>>
>> He yIchoHmoH
>> Be the cause of you changing the course!
>>
>>
> Hmm, shouldn't that sentence translate rather as "Let the course change
> it/sth.!"? The verb's not reflexive, so the subject/causer cannot be the
> object here. If {choH} means change (the transitive verb), then "choHmoH"
> would mean "cause sth. to change sth.", thus, in {He yIchoHmoH} you order
> the course itself to change something else.
That was exactly the point of my investigation earlier. Whenever {-moH}
is used with (apparently) transitive verbs, it doesn't follow the
pattern [Verb A] --> [A VerbmoH B] like verbs of quality. Instead it
looks like [B Verb A] ("A verbs B") --> [B VerbmoH A] ("A verbs B and
was the direct cause of that action").
--
SuStel
http://www.trimboli.name/
![[KLI Member]](/pics/KLImemberbutton.gif "[KLI Member]"){kind=small}
![[Hol po'wI']](/pics/level3_big.png "[Hol po'wI']"){kind=small}