[Tlhingan-hol] KLBC: moHaq mojaq DuHmey

[mayql qunenoS]

> 'a wot 'oHbe'.

lengwI' 'oH {be'}'e'. lengwI'mey moHaq je vImuvlaH'a' ?

qun HoD

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 8:02 PM, Bellerophon, modeler
<bellerophon.modeler at gmail.com> wrote:
> ghItlhpu' 'arHa, jatlh:
>>Sometimes, though, the suffix happens to match a legal verb root: {vIlaH}
>> for example.
>
> yIyep 'arHa! DIp 'oHlaH mu' <laH>'e', 'a wot 'oHbe'. mu'wIj vIpupmoH: wot
> 'oHlaH je wej 'e' 'angpu' matlh.
>
> ~'eD
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 12:38 PM, SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/8/2015 12:29 PM, John R. Harness wrote:
>>
>>> This is what I don't know for sure: Can a verb that becomes a noun with
>>> {-ghach} or {-wI'} have a prefix still on it? In other words, are these
>>> legal/how would you translate them?
>>>
>>> -{*choSuvHa'ghach} - (Your mis-fighting of me?)
>>> -{*HIDevwI'} .... ? You, one who leads me?
>>
>>
>> This is a very old question, and to my knowledge Okrand has never said no
>> and has never used such a formation.
>>
>> I feel fairly confident that these are not allowed. Although Klingon does
>> not have an infinitive, I believe verbs with these type 9 suffixes must
>> effectively be infinitive in order to use them. That is, they cannot refer
>> to any subject, even an unspecified one as in {-lu'}.
>>
>> --
>> SuStel
>> http://www.trimboli.name/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
>> Tlhingan-hol at kli.org
>> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
>
>
>
>
> --
> My modeling blog:          http://bellerophon-modeler.blogspot.com/
> My other modeling blog:  http://bellerophon.blog.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol at kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
>