[87267] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: Usage of -Ha' (was: Checking understanding of -be')
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (ghunchu'wI')
Sat Nov 28 12:39:10 2009
In-Reply-To: <4B10766D.7020105@trimboli.name>
From: "ghunchu'wI'" <qunchuy@alcaco.net>
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 12:37:58 -0500
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
On Nov 27, 2009, at 8:01 PM, David Trimboli wrote:
> {-Ha'} doesn't "rove," even though it's called a rover. It always
> comes
> right after the verb, before any other suffixes.
That's what TKD tells us, and that's how we use it. It acts almost
as though it's part of the verb itself.
In the interests of full disclosure, there's an exceptional example
in the text for Skybox card SP2, {SuvwI' taj} "Blade of the Warrior":
{...not Hub'eghrupHa' lo'wI'...}
"...the user is never caught at a disadvantage..."
> It gives the verb a sense of either "undo" or "do wrongly."
We also often find Marc Okrand pointing out that {-Ha'} can imply a
change of state, even without an associated {-choH}.
-- ghunchu'wI'
