[Tlhingan-hol] {-be'} and {-qu'} with type 7 and 9 verb suffixes

[Robyn Stewart]

-chuqqu’ makes perfect sense in context.  Remember that –qu’ emphasizes.

SuvtaH loDnI’wI’.

‘Iv Suv?

ghol luSuvbe’.  Suvchuqqu’taH.  

Don’t think of it so much as exceptions, as only saying things that make sense.

 

- Qov

 

From: Michael Kúnin [mailto:netzakh at yahoo.com] 
Sent: October 28, 2015 8:33
To: Philip Newton
Cc: tlhingan-hol at kli.org
Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] {-be'} and {-qu'} with type 7 and 9 verb suffixes

 

 

jagh yIbuS!

 

The question as to type 7 (and e.g. Type 1) remains: {-lI'be'}? {-chuqqu'}?, though "can come just about anywhere" might imply more exceptions than after vs9.

 

Qapla'!

 


On 28 October 2015 at 00:38, Michael Kúnin <netzakh at yahoo.com> wrote:

 


> While the usage of these rovers with main verbs and with type 2 suffixes or
> {-laH} is well attested, it occurred to me that nothing explicitly prevents
> {-be'} and {-qu'} from being added to ANY verb suffix.



Nothing? Except, perhaps TKD section 4.3, which says that ‘Rovers […]
can come just about anywhere except following a Type 9 suffix’.

That seems pretty explicit to me.

Cheers,
Philip

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/attachments/20151028/a673ed19/attachment.html>