[tlhIngan Hol] Can we have the {-be'} twice ?

[Ed Bailey]

jatlh Lieven:

>
> TKD further says that {-be'} "follows the concept being negated". If I
> take this literally, I could probably use it nine times one a verb with
> nine sufixes:
> {jIghelbe'choHbe'laHbe'taHbe'} "I am not continously not able to not
> change not asking"
>
> What context would prompt you to form a verb like this? Even with your
explanation, no matter how often I read the word (well, about 8 times so
far), I still get lost by the end.

Multiple negation becomes confusing very quickly (in any language, I
expect).

But even if we find out it's definitely ungrammatical, using multiple -qu'
for added emphasis seems like one of those intentional violations Klingons
use for effect. I could say something like be'nalwI' SoS pI'qu'qu'!
(Actually this statement is very false, but I was thinking of an old joke.)

~mIp'av
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20161116/7f43d637/attachment.htm>