[tlhIngan Hol] The {-wI'} and the {-lu'}

[SuStel]

On 8/26/2017 6:29 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
> Whenever we place the {-wI'} on a verb, we produce the meaning "one 
> who does/is, thing which does/is".
>
> So, if we write {vumwI'} then we have the meaning of "one who works".
>
> But if we wrote instead {vumlu'wI'}, then we would 
> seemingly/apparently get the meaning "someone (unspecified) who works".
>
> So, the conclusion here is that "the {-wI'} used on its own, talks of 
> someone specified, while the use of it in conjunction with {-lu'} 
> talks of someone unspecified" ?

*-wI'* doesn't mean someone specified does something; it turns the verb 
into its own subject. A *vumwI'* is someone who does *vum.* But a verb 
with *-lu'* has no subject, so there is nothing for *-wI'* to turn the 
verb into.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20170826/11b5fda3/attachment-0016.htm>