[294] in tlhIngan-Hol
odds 'n' ends
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Fri May 1 20:23:49 1992
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
From: krankor@IMA.ISC.COM (Captain Krankor)
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
Date: Fri, 1 May 92 19:15:10 -0400
First off, Mark is quite correct about the neH thing. I confess: I actually
only skimmed his posting enough to see that he was on the mark (no pun
intended), and didn't examine every last detail. Boy, is my face red {{:-)
Ken puts out a whole thing about "transitive" vs. "intransitive" verbs.
Very interesting, but I don't think it is supported by what we have. There
is currently no notion whatsoever that Klingon makes such a distinction in
its verbs, as we have talked about before. As far as I can tell, the strict
suffix-order applies. As for the so-called "lexicalized" words, I did
happen to have a chance to exchange a word or two with Mr. Okrand on that
subject. He was not real clear on the subject, but I came away with the
notion that such words are listed like that for convenience, and don't
constitute a grammatically separate category-- that is, they are nothing
more or less than the normal base-verb with the normal verb-suffix applied.
So, in short, there does not appear to be any "magic" in -moH. It would
be an entirely plausible way for it to work, such that for all we know
Okrand will decide that that's it and we'll find out in the next dict. But
from the data we have available to us right now, it looks to me like pure
invention. The text on -wI' clearly states that it does a transformation;
that on -moH gives no indication of any such thing.
--Krankor
