[93298] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] 'e'mo'
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Felix Malmenbeck)
Sun May 20 12:25:11 2012
From: Felix Malmenbeck <felixm@kth.se>
To: De'vID jonpIn <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com>, "tlhIngan-Hol@kli.org"
<tlhIngan-Hol@kli.org>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2012 16:24:44 +0000
In-Reply-To: <CA+7zAmNLoZ7T_UKsS6f8xNxL=Wxpk5VeQHK2t+9T0vFy-L2W3Q@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
I've done it, but I doubt it's actually correct; {'e'} is always an object, after all.
> Because when I'm speaking, I sometimes finish saying something before I realise I wanted to
> make it the first part of a longer sentence, and I don't want to start over.
What about {vaj}?
________________________________________
From: De'vID jonpIn [de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2012 16:38
To: tlhIngan-Hol@kli.org
Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] 'e'mo'
QeS 'utlh:
> "They ['e' and net] are always treated as the object of the verb, and the
> verb always takes a prefix indicating a third-person singular object."
Ah, that settles it.
QeS 'utlh:
> So since {'e'} and {net} require verbal agreement, that basically ties
> them to the direct object position. So no, I doubt that {'e'} can take
> suffixes. Was there a particular reason you were wondering?
Because when I'm speaking, I sometimes finish saying something before I realise I wanted to make it the first part of a longer sentence, and I don't want to start over.
--
De'vID
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
