[tlhIngan Hol] Can I use verb type 9 suffix {-wI'}, after other suffixes ?

[mayqel qunenoS]

SuStel, Andre Muller, Lawrence M. Schoen and Voragh thank you !

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Steven Boozer <sboozer at uchicago.edu> wrote:
> Such nouns are not very common – so don’t go crazy -  but they are allowed.
> Here are a few more I could find:
>
>
>
> ngaQHa'moHwI'  key (TNK)
>
> bochmoHwI'     sycophant, flatterer, one who tries to curry
>
> favor by flattering a superior (slang) KGT
>
>
>
> chenmoHwI'     creator,  maker KGT
>               (e.g. Hew chenmoHwI' sculptor)
>
>
>
> najmoHwI'      lullaby (n) KGT
>
>
>
> ngaDmoHwI'     stabilizer (component of a ship) KGT
>
>
>
> wovmoHwI'      light (device) KBoP (n)
>
>               (e.g. wovmoHwI' moQ  light bulb (TNK)
>
>
>
> yIntaHwI'      living (person),  the living PB
> jubbe'wI'      mortal (person) (n) PB
>
> Heghpu'wI'     dead (person),  the dead PB
>
>
>
> yoymoHwI'      inverter (device) (n)
>
> pIlHa'wI'      "unmotivated one" (i.e. one who is apathetic)
>
> SaHHa'wI'      one who is not concerned (i.e. one who is apathetic))
>
> quvHa'wI'      dishonored one
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: tlhIngan-Hol [mailto:tlhingan-hol-bounces at lists.kli.org] On Behalf Of
> André Müller
> Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 8:55 AM
> To: tlhingan-hol at kli.org
> Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Can I use verb type 9 suffix {-wI'}, after other
> suffixes ?
>
>
>
> Yes, there's no problem with it. If the semantics still make sense after
> nominalizing a verb with {-wI'} I see no problem. You could describe someone
> who is willing to learn Klingon as a {ghojqangwI'}, and someone who is
> afraid to speak a {jatlhvIpwI'}. And so on... we also have a few examples of
> canonical words involving {-wI'} and a verbal suffix:
>
> * {QaDmoHwI' DIr} = towel (lit.: dry-maker skin)
>
> * {Say'moHwI' tlhagh} = soap (lit.: clean-maker fat)
>
> * {Sut HabmoHwI'} = iron (lit.: clothing smooth-maker)
>
> I see no reason to think that this shouldn't work with other suffixes just
> as well.
>
> What's arguable not possible (but we don't know for sure, I think) is using
> {-wI'} on a verb with prefixes. I would probably not accept ?{muparHa'wI'}
> as a word for 'someone who likes me'.
>
> - André
>
>
>
> 2016-06-27 15:40 GMT+02:00 mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun at gmail.com>:
>
> So far, I considered verb type 9 suffix {-wI'), as a suffix, one could
> use on a verb, which verb didn't have a preceding suffix. And I really
> don't know why I had that impression.
>
> But recently, at another thread, I saw someone using the verb type 9
> suffix {-wI'}, on a verb which had another type of verb suffix,
> preceding the {-wI'}.
>
> So, I want to ask ; is this allowed ? Can I place the verb type 9
> suffix, on a verb which has another verb suffix, preceding ?
>
> Of course the question would be : "why would you want to ?". Right now
> I can't think of a reason. However I remember that the person who had
> used it this way, had actually created a construction which made
> perfect sense, and was appropriate for the occasion.
>
> mop Hurgh qunnoq
> QeH SeHlu'bogh Hol 'oH tlhIngan Hol'e'
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>