[tlhIngan Hol] tuQ and tuQmoH difference

[SuStel]

On 2/19/2019 7:38 PM, Daniel Dadap wrote:
>> On Feb 19, 2019, at 08:32, SuStel<sustel at trimboli.name>  wrote:
>>
>> HIpwIj vItuQ'eghmoH
> I find this example interesting because it violates the rule of type one verb suffixes requiring a no object prefix.

You're right; I probably goofed with that one. It probably needs to be 
*jIHvaD HIpwIj vItuQmoH.*

I think there's canon of another violation like this, but I don't want 
to go claiming it's definitely allowed. I don't remember what the canon 
is, though.


-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190219/3c2f11f2/attachment-0015.htm>