[Tlhingan-hol] Multiple verb suffixes

[Bellerophon, modeler]

On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 9:26 PM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com> wrote:

> Q: ghorgh tujchoHpu' bIQ?
>
> A: bIDachtaHvIS, tujchoHpu' bIQ.
>
I take it you would interpret {tujchoHpu'} as something like "finish
becoming hot." Why not just {tujchoH}, as SuStel asked? Because water
becomes hot gradually? Certainly not because you need {-pu'} for
grammatical tense! I'd think the change of state might be considered
perfective in its own right, or have continuous and perfective aspects,
depending on whether the process is of interest to the speaker and the
listener, as it might be if the kettle was taking too long to boil. Also
possible then would be {tujchoHtaH bIQ}.

This means the Type 7 suffix acts not on the root, but on the root + Type 3
suffix as a whole. It strongly implies some kind of grammatical "chain
rule;" that each suffix modifies the totality of what precedes it, like so:

[...(((prefix+verb+suffix)+suffix)+suffix)+...]

Type 8 would be an exception; it's merely like saying "Sir" at the
appropriate time. But rovers clearly modify what comes before them.

I wish now I could remember the example someone on this list cited, in
which they interpreted a suffix as applying to the verb + the following
suffix. It seems like it was something along the lines of {lo'moHlaH},
interpreted as "make usable" instead of "can cause to use." At the time I
had no more reason to question this interpretation than a vague feeling.

It seems like the combined action of multiple suffixes would be an
important grammatical rule, though I have never seen one stated.

~'eD
-- 
My modeling blog:          http://bellerophon-modeler.blogspot.com/
My other modeling blog:  http://bellerophon.blog.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/attachments/20140414/7a09f415/attachment-0001.html>