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

Lieven levinius at gmx.de
Wed Nov 16 05:01:10 PST 2016

Am 16.11.2016 um 13:14 schrieb kechpaja:
> At the qepHom earlier this month, Marc told me and a few other folks
> that you can't have more than one {-be'} (or more than one {-qu'}) in a
> single word.

I can confirm that, because I also observed or even was part of the 
discussion. But...

Anyway, I should not that this was one of the situations where Okrand 
was overwhelmed by the question and may have answered without intensely 
thinking about it, hence maybe unintentionally contradicting himself.

There was someone who mentioned that "no more than one suffix of each 
type may occur at a time" (chapter 4.2.10 TKD). It was this that Okrand 
confirmed. The mentioned rule regards only non-rovers. I'm sure Okrand 
did not think of the possible construction with two {-be'} in one word, 
so I would not put too much weight on what he said.

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"

Hey, let's add some -qu' and -Qo' :-)

{qaleghbe'qu'} sounds okay, I guess we even have canon examples that 
will confirm that.

Lieven L. Litaer
aka Quvar valer 'utlh
Grammarian of the KLI

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list