[Tlhingan-hol] Semantic roles with -moH... again

[De'vID jonpIn]

bI'reng:
>> I have to confess, I don't know what to make of {tuQmoH}. It doesn't
seem to fit the syntactic rule, but it doesn't fit the proposed semantic
rule either (in so far as that rule is subjective). I think it's a victim
of semantic drift, like {lo'laH}.

'e' vIHar je.  {lo'laH} rurlaw'.  choHlu'.

quljIb:
> How about this?
>
> {HIp vItuQ} - I wear the uniform.
> {HIp vItuQ jIH} - *I* wear the uniform.  (Not someone else.)

QochlaH pagh.

> {HIp vItuQmoH} - I dress (someone) in a uniform.
> {HIp vItuQeghmoH} - I dress myself in a uniform.

'ach tay'DI' {vI-}, {'egh} je, tlhIngan Hol pab wemlu'be''a'?

> {HIqraj qatuQmoH} - You dress me in your uniform.  (Prefix trick.)

mu'tlheghvam DaqontaHvIS bIchechlaw'!  {{:-p

{HIq} tuQlu'be', tlhutlhlu' neH.  'ej Qoch {-raj}, {qa-} je.

{HIqlIj chotlhutlhmoH} - You make me drink your alcohol.

> {HIqwIj vItuQHa'moH} - I undress (from) my uniform.

chaq latlhvaD HIplIj DatuQHa'moH.

> {puqloDwI'vaD DuSaQ HIqDaj vItuQHa'moH} - I undress my son from his
school uniform.

puqloDlI' DuSaQDaq HIq jablu''a'?  Do'qu'.

> {HIqvam mutuQmoH 'IpwI'} - My oath causes me to wear this uniform.  <==
Note the difference, here!

{HIpvam mutuQmoH be'nalwI'}
{HIpvam mutuQmoH 'IpwIj}

pIm'a' pabchaj?

--
De'vID
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/attachments/20120209/a902695a/attachment.html>