[Tlhingan-hol] 'e'mo'

[Rohan Fenwick - QeS 'utlh]

ghItlhpu' De'vID, jatlh:
> This is probably a simple point of grammar that I've forgotten but can
> the pronoun {'e'} take suffices?
> For example, is {'e'mo'} "because of that [i.e., the previous sentence]"
> legal?

It's never been said explicitly that that's the case, but I believe it's
impossible, for a few reasons. To begin with, {'e'} has never appeared in
canon with a noun suffix of any kind, type 5 or otherwise. Secondly, like
ghunchu'wI' has said, {'e'mo'} would be functionally the same as using
{-mo'} on the previous verb and for the other type 5s, they don't make any
sense at all (what on earth does {'e'Daq} or {'e'vo'} even mean?). That's
strike two. Thirdly and most simply, in TKD 6.2.5 it says the following:

"They ['e' and net] are always treated as the object of the verb, and the
verb always takes a prefix indicating a third-person singular object."

So since {'e'} and {net} require verbal agreement, that basically ties
them to the direct object position. So no, I doubt that {'e'} can take
suffixes. Was there a particular reason you were wondering?

QeS 'utlh