[85068] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: A fun application of the "prefix trick"
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Terrence Donnelly)
Wed Sep 17 21:33:38 2008
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 18:31:32 -0700 (PDT)
From: Terrence Donnelly <terrence.donnelly@sbcglobal.net>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
In-Reply-To: <1141F3D5-0060-4FAF-84B6-D96AD55DBCAF@embarqmail.com>
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
--- On Wed, 9/17/08, Doq <doq@embarqmail.com> wrote:
>
> Second, don't start an old argument and claim that you
> aren't starting
> an old argument.
What I meant was, I will not waste bandwidth rehashing old arguments that can never be resolved by anything other than Okrand's intervention. However, that doesn't mean I will let someone speak as if the issue was settled, without a protest. If you are interested in my side of the debate, you can check here:
http://teresh.tdonnelly.org/kligramm.html
>
> For all new students of the Klingon language, please note
> that there
> is not a single instance of canon or any description from
> Okrand that
> suggests that when you add {-moH} to a verb, it doesn't
> change the
> direct object of the verb.
There's also no suggestion anywhere that it does.
>This is wholly Ter'eS's
> idea. Maybe he has
> convinced someone else here as well. If so, I'm sure
> we'll hear from
> them.
ghaHvaD quHDaj qawmoH Ha'quj 'his sash reminds him of his heritage.' [Skybox card 20]
How would _you_ say "He remembers his heritage"?
>
> Meanwhile, there are plenty of examples of {-moH} changing
> the direct
> object of a verb.
Please cite some. We have several examples of intransitive verbs taking -moH and an object, but as far as I know, the above sentence is the only one where a transitive verb takes -moH _and_ has an object _and_ has a causee.
-- ter'eS
