[tlhIngan Hol] Adjective suffixes

[mayqel qunenoS]

ok, thanks !

however, it is a pity {Duj tInba'} isn't allowed. it would be wonderful to
be able to say "the obviously big ship".

qunnoH jan puqloD
ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'

On 13 Dec 2016 10:46 am, "André Müller" <esperantist at gmail.com> wrote:

> Somewhere (TKD I suppose) it's written that the only suffixes following a
> verb used as an adjective can be the negation suffixes {-be', -Ha'} and the
> intensifier {-qu'}. I think it's logical that both can occur together. So I
> have no doubts that you can say {Duj tInqu'be'} with the intended meaning.
>
> But other suffixes are excluded, do the answer to question 2 is no. It is
> easily understood, but ungrammatical.
>
> - André
>
> On 13 Dec 2016 08:18, "mayqel qunenoS" <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I've been meaning to ask..
>
> 1st question: Can we have on a be-verb which is used adjectively, more
> than one rover-type suffix ? Can we write {Duj tInqu'be'} for "not
> very big ship" ?
>
> 2nd question: Can we have on a be-verb which is used adjectively, a
> non-rover suffix ? Can I write {Duj tInba'} for "obviously big ship" ?
>
> qunnoH jan puqloD
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20161213/46be0849/attachment-0016.htm>