[Tlhingan-hol] KLBC: {-mo'} noun suffix vs. {-mo'} verb suffix

[mayql qunenoS]

ok, thanks ! So, and in order to be 100% certain I will ask :

Whenever the -mo' noun suffix migrates to the end of a noun - be verb
pair, the resulting construction needs to come first in the sentence.
So far so good. Does the same apply when the rest of the type 5 noun
suffixes are concerned ? For instance will the constructions {noun -
be verb}Daq, {noun - be verb}vo', {noun - be verb}vaD need to be
placed too at the beginning of the sentence ?

I realize that perhaps I'm asking that someone confirms the obvious,
however please bear with me ; I don't want to learn anything wrong,
thus creating bad habits for myself..

cpt qunnoq
DaH DIHIvbe'chugh vaj qo'chajDaq toy'wI''a'pu' DImoj

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 4:40 PM, lojmIttI'wI'nuv
<lojmitti7wi7nuv at gmail.com> wrote:
> {-mo’} applied to a noun phrase can’t change to behave like a verb suffix
> any more than {-Daq} or {-‘e’} or {-vaD}. The noun and verb suffixes {-mo’}
> and {-mo’} sound alike and have a similar sense of meaning, but they are not
> the same suffix, any more than “wear” and “ware” are the same words in
> English. Since we write Klingon phonetically, we can’t have different
> spellings of homonyms to differentiate them.
>
> pItlh
> lojmIt tI'wI'nuv
>
>
>
> On Feb 18, 2016, at 4:54 AM, mayql qunenoS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> jIH:
>
> vavlI' mIpmo', bInguq or bInguq, vavlI' mIpmo'.
> because of your rich father you're arrogant.
>
> Qov:
>
> muj cha'DIch. Because {vavlI' mIp} is a noun phrase "your rich father" it
> can only precede the clause it modifies. Yes, -mo' is on a erb, but it's
> only on a verb because it has followed the rule and migrated to the verb
> that modifies vavlI'.
>
>
> Thank you for telling me this ; I had the misconception that the -mo'
> noun suffix, as soon as it migrated to a verb, it would start behaving
> as a verb suffix !
>
> cpt qunnoq
> attack or be slaves
>
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 10:01 PM,  <qov at kli.org> wrote:
>
> Ha'DIbaHlIjmo' jIvem.
> because of your dog I woke up.
>
>
> maj.
>
> QIpmo' Ha'DIbaHlIj, jIvem or jIvem, QIpmo' Ha'DIbaHlIj.
> because your dog is stupid, I woke up.
>
>
> maj.
>
> vavlI'mo' bImIp.
> because of your father you're rich.
>
>
> maj.
>
> vavlI' mIpmo', bInguq or bInguq, vavlI' mIpmo'.
> because of your rich father you're arrogant.
>
>
> muj cha'DIch. Because {vavlI' mIp} is a noun phrase "your rich father" it
> can only precede the clause it modifies. Yes, -mo' is on a erb, but it's
> only on a verb because it has followed the rule and migrated to the verb
> that modifies vavlI'.
>
> vavlI' mIpmo' bInguq.
> or
> bInguq mIpmo' vavlI'. = You are arrogant because your father is rich.
> See the difference?
>
> puH DujlIjmo' jIrIQ.
> because of your car I'm injured.
>
> muqIpmo' puH DujlIj, jIrIQ or jIrIQ, muqIpmo' puH DujlIj.
> because your car hit me I am injured.
>
>
> maj.
>
> If at the above sentences there are mistakes, please do tell me. Also, the
> way I understand this a noun bearing a -mo' must always come on the
> beginning of a sentence, whereas a verb with a -mo' can be placed either
>
> at
>
> the beginning or the end. If I understand this wrong, please correct me.
>
>
> Your understanding is correct, with the little adjustment above, for when
> the verb is acting as an adjective.  Also lojmIt tIwI' nuv personally
> prefers that verb clauses with -mo' also go before the main clause. There's
> no rule at all, he just likes it that way, so when I'm writing to make him
> happy, I do that.  :-)
>
> - Qov
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol at kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol at kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol at kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
>