[tlhIngan Hol] mej

[mayqel qunenoS]

SuStel:
> I see no problem with it.

You mean that you see no problem with placing the {-vo} or omitting it ? Or
do you mean that both are equally acceptable ?

qunnoq

On 14 Jul 2017 4:10 pm, "SuStel" <sustel at trimboli.name> wrote:

> On 7/14/2017 4:12 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
>
> On another thread I noticed that both qurgh and lieven wrote:
>
> qurgh:
> > tetlhvam mejpu'.
> lieven:
> > tetlhvam mejta'chugh
>
> I can understand that these obviously mean "this list she left", and "if
> she has left this list" respectively.
>
> But just to make certain, I neen to ask: Couldn't we also write
> {tetlhvamvo' mejpu'} and {tetlhvamvo' mejta'chugh} ?
>
> This is basically the "verbs of motion" argument all over again, only this
> time the verb's object contains an inherent "away from" meaning. I see no
> problem with it.
>
> Apparently, Okrand has never used an object with *mej,* so it's difficult
> to know for sure.
>
> --
> SuStelhttp://trimboli.name
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20170714/1e13527a/attachment-0016.htm>