[tlhIngan Hol] {meH}ed nouns and verb prefixes

De'vID de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com
Wed Apr 4 00:46:17 PDT 2018


On 31 March 2018 at 13:31, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I was under the impression, that {meH}ed nouns as {QongmeH Duj} don't take
> verb prefixes.
>
> However, a little bird told me that on "s.e. 1998.01.18" (whatever the
> ghe''or "s.e." actually is..), there is the canon sentence of:
>
> {jIpaSqu'mo' narghpu' qaSuchmeH 'eb}
>
> because I'm very late, the opportunity to visit you has escaped
>
> And here, we *do* have a verb prefix on a {meH}ed noun.
>

Where did you get the idea of this "rule" from?

I think maybe the idea is that nouns with such prefixes are extemporaneous
constructions, and wouldn't be found in a dictionary. I don't recall that
anyone has said that they're illegal?

-- 
De'vID
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20180404/4d56aac8/attachment.html>


More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list