[109069] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Rendered fat
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (De'vID)
Thu Feb 23 17:30:02 2017
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
In-Reply-To: <8c886974-f90d-d902-f52d-72a05f5bf736@trimboli.name>
From: "De'vID" <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 12:51:02 +0100
To: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Cc: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
On 18 February 2017 at 05:24, Ed Bailey <bellerophon.modeler@gmail.com> wrote:
> Oh, boy, the {-lu'} plus {-wI'} thing again! I so wish MO would finally rule
> on this, since it's immediately obvious to some this combination nominalizes
> the same way as "-ee" in "employee," but others regard the construction as
> grammatical gibberish, and they seem to have convinced most to avoid using
> it.
Count me among those who think it's gibberish. I don't see how it's
immediately obvious that a suffix which indicates "no subject" and a
suffix which turns a verb into its subject can be compatible.
--
De'vID
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
