[111426] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] DSC Klingon Trailer transcription (NOT offlist)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (ghunchu'wI' 'utlh)
Fri Oct 6 04:16:07 2017
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
From: ghunchu'wI' 'utlh <qunchuy@alcaco.net>
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2017 18:17:39 -0400
In-Reply-To: <4366af12-c90d-f1fa-1beb-456f3a4227c1@trimboli.name>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
On Oct 4, 2017, at 3:32 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
>
> If they're allowed at all, there HAVE to be special circumstances, some special explanation that makes them stand apart from the first- and second-person prefixes, and you have no idea what that explanation might be.
*I* have an idea what that explanation might be. It generalizes the prefix trick to explain things like {tuQmoH} and other uses of {-moH} on already transitive verbs. All it says is that when the prefix appears to violate the rule of {rom}, it could be pointing to the "indirect object" beneficiary instead of the (direct) object. Usually the beneficiary is implied by the prefix and the object is explicit, but I also consider cases where the normal object is missing and the grammatical beneficiary can be stated in its place.
-- ghunchu'wI'
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
