[tlhIngan Hol] Can I say maQeHchuqchoHmoH ?

SuStel sustel at trimboli.name
Thu Jan 31 11:10:56 PST 2019

On 1/31/2019 1:49 PM, Will Martin wrote:
> The weirdness is that the prefix suggests no direct object, but the 
> {-moH} seems to require one.

*-moH* does not require an object of any kind. Its description says 
simply that it means the subject is causing something. It doesn't say 
anything about objects. All it means is that the subject /causes/ the 
verb instead of doing the verb. And then we have examples like 
*maghoSchoHmoHneS'a'*/may we execute a course (to some place)?/ in TKD 
and *SeymoH QeH* /anger excites/ in TKW that back up the idea that an 
object is not necessary.

> The {-choH} is probably unnecessary, unless your focus is on the fact 
> that we are BEGINNING to cause each other to be angry. 

This is my understanding of what mayqel is asking for. It's not an 
answer to why we always make each other angry; it's answering how we got 
into the state *(-choH)* of being angry. The *-choH* is needed for that. 
The confusion is entirely from the English sentence: does /we anger each 
other/ mean we get each other into an angry state, or does it mean we 
are angry whenever we are together? I would be more inclined to think he 
means the former, and his Klingon sentence backs up that belief, but 
either is possible.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190131/8b1d5191/attachment.html>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list