[111463] in tlhIngan-Hol
[tlhIngan Hol] Verbs which contain for, about, etc
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (mayqel qunenoS)
Fri Oct 6 07:11:10 2017
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
In-Reply-To: <CAP7F2cKtExQDYpo+jh0H5yjhRBHyfqWhx+EPh7bL-6JzTgu0CQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 21:45:02 +0300
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
--===============4603543744145319491==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c1939764fb1c9055ad11f99"
--94eb2c1939764fb1c9055ad11f99
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
There are some verbs, which contain the concept of "for, about, etc". For
example {SaH} "care about, be concerned about".
And we have said, that when we are using these verbs, we don't place an
additional {-vaD} on the word, which would take a {-vaD}, if the "for,
about, etc" concept wasn't included in the verb.
For example, we say {romuluSngan vISaHbe'} and not {romuluSnganvaD
vISaHbe'}.
But I need to ask.. If we did write {romuluSnganvaD vISaHbe'}, would that
be wrong ?
And in case someone wonders why I'm asking..
In cases where I wanted to say "I gave to myself a present", since there is
no prefix for "me-myself", I wrote {qunnoqvaD nob vInob}.
But if I want to say "we care only for us", and I want to write {maHvaD neH
maSaH}, I stumble upon the fact that the concept of {-vaD} is already
included in the {SaH}.
So, because of this reason I ask, "can we use a {-vaD} with verbs such as
{SaH} ?" Can I write {maHvaD neH maSaH} ?
mayqel q
--94eb2c1939764fb1c9055ad11f99
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"auto">There are some verbs, which contain the concept of "=
for, about, etc". For example {SaH} "care about, be concerned abo=
ut".<div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">And we have said, th=
at when we are using these verbs, we don't place an additional {-vaD} o=
n the word, which would take a {-vaD}, if the "for, about, etc" c=
oncept wasn't included in the verb.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><d=
iv dir=3D"auto">For example, we say {romuluSngan vISaHbe'} and not {rom=
uluSnganvaD vISaHbe'}.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"aut=
o">But I need to ask.. If we did write {romuluSnganvaD vISaHbe'}, would=
that be wrong ?</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">And in =
case someone wonders why I'm asking..</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div>=
<div dir=3D"auto">In cases where I wanted to say "I gave to myself a p=
resent", since there is no prefix for "me-myself", I wrote {=
qunnoqvaD nob vInob}.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Bu=
t if I want to say "we care only for us", and I want to write {ma=
HvaD neH maSaH}, I stumble upon the fact that the concept of {-vaD} is alre=
ady included in the {SaH}.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"aut=
o">So, because of this reason I ask, "can we use a {-vaD} with verbs s=
uch as {SaH} ?" Can I write {maHvaD neH maSaH} ?</div><div dir=3D"auto=
"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">mayqel q</div></div>
--94eb2c1939764fb1c9055ad11f99--
--===============4603543744145319491==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
--===============4603543744145319491==--
