[110293] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] HeghmoH
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Lieven)
Fri Aug 4 03:39:21 2017
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
From: Lieven <levinius@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2017 09:39:18 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CAP7F2cKmXdJG5QU771E3wse4bOO6vFYmoHXdXnw7rzPsKugxrw@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
Am 04.08.2017 um 08:41 schrieb mayqel qunenoS:
> I understand the replies given so far, however I can't understand the
> reason which prohibits the full use of {HeghmoH} as a be-verb, i.e.
> its use in the way of {tera' yav 'atlhqam HeghmoH} for "fatal
> mushroom".
> Is this happening because of the presence of {-moH} ?
Yes.
It's basically because it's not a real "be-verb", it's only the
translation that misleadingly includes the verb "be".
I don't remember the source, but it was once confirmed that all verbs
that include a suffix in their definition are basically just a verb plus
a suffix and should be treated as such.
--
Lieven L. Litaer
aka Quvar valer 'utlh
Grammarian of the KLI
http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher
http://www.klingonwiki.net
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
