[88641] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: mu'tlheghvam yIlughmoH
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ruben Molina)
Fri Jan 7 22:02:39 2011
In-Reply-To: <7B3E97B63FD04D7EB9153C6C59A93B5C@Nargothrond>
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 21:48:49 -0500
From: Ruben Molina <rmolina@gmail.com>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 8:14 PM, David Trimboli <david@trimboli.name> wrote:
> From: Ruben Molina
>
>> {bomvam 'o'megh' vISov 'ach 'e' vISovlI'}.
>
> You've hit a common pitfall. When using the pronouns {'e'} or {net}, the
> second verb cannot take a Type 7 suffix. There have been exceptions to
> this, but the general rule appears in TKD on page 66. You cannot put
> {lI'} on {Sov} there.
>
Daj.
'ach {bomvam 'o'megh' vISovlI' 'ach wej 'e' vISovbej} yIqel, qar'a'
DaH, <aspect> mojaQmey Hutlh mu'tlheghwIj cha'DIch wot.
'ach lojmIt tI'wI' nuv mu'mey vIyajpu'chugh, vaj:
{bomvam 'o'megh'} 'oSchugh {'e'} vaj qar mu'tlheghwIj
<I'm making progress in knowing the ending of this song, but I don't
know it (the ending of this song) for sure yet.>
'e' vIHechpu' 'ach qarbe' mu'tlheghwIj
cha' {bomvam 'o'megh' vISovlI'} 'oSbejchugh {'e'} vaj qarbe' mu'tlheghwIj
<I'm making progress in knowing the ending of this song, but I don't
know that (if I'm making progress in knowing) for sure yet.>
'e' vIHechbe'pu' 'ej qar mu'tlheghwIj
qaq'a' {bomvam 'o'megh' vISovlI' 'ach wej bomvam 'o'megh' vISovbej}
> Everybody falls into this trap. Some people even ignore the rule
> intentionally.
David qatlho'
ruben
