[tlhIngan Hol] More on {-moH} and tritransitive verbs

[Michael Kúnin]

Starting with what we know well:

1. Intransitive -> Transitive
{yIt K} "K walks"
{K yItmoH F} "F makes K walk" / "F walks K"

2. Transitive -> Ditransitive
{X ghoj K} "K learns X"
{KvaD X ghojmoH F} "F makes K learn X" / "F teaches X to K"

And now the step to the unknown:
3. Ditransitive -> Tritransitive
{ZvaD X nob K} "K gives X to Z"
Goal: "F makes K give X to Z"

3.1. By the logic "expand 2. above," we start with "F makes K give X":
{KvaD X nobmoH F}
Then we need to insert Z somehow
*{ZvaD KvaD X nobmoH F} is clearly ambiguous
*{Z'e' KvaD X nobmoH F} "As for Z, F makes K give X"

3.2. By the logic "keep existing objects and make the original subject as close as possible," we start with
*{Zvad X nobmoH F}
and need to insert K somehow
*{K'e' ZvaD X nobmoH F}?
note that if this logic applies, then we cannot mechanically translate this "As for K, F makes Z give X" just as {KvaD X ghojmoH F} does not mean *"F makes X learn for K" but "F makes K learn X"

3.3. Lieven's suggestion
*{X'e' ZvaD K nobmoH F}
...if would be so much easier if {KvaD X ghojmoH F} were *{X'e' K ghojmoH F}... but this does not exclude that the tritransitive construction, if any, works this way

3.4. Semantically, what about
*{ZvaD Kvo' X noblu'moH F} or  *{Kvo' ZvaD X noblu'moH F}?
however, itdoes not seem so easy to use this approach with {'ang} or {cha'}

3.5. [rant] And now remove F, add {-wI'}, and consider using it as a heading. [/rant]
P.S. To avoid confusion: {mayqel qunenoS} and I are different persons.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20161208/f55b9bf1/attachment-0017.htm>