[tlhIngan Hol] placing {-lu'} on {'oH} and {ghaH}

Lieven L. Litaer levinius at gmx.de
Sun Jul 7 22:54:43 PDT 2019


Am 07.07.2019 um 19:35 schrieb SuStel:
> With all that, there's little difficulty in interpreting *-lu'* on a
> pronoun: the topic noun has been made indefinite.

When you explain it that way, it makes sense.

>> We know that -lu' reverse the object-subject,
>
> FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THAT IS GOOD AND HOLY, NO IT DOESN'T! Everyone needs
> to unlearn this falsehood immediately.
[...]
> The object always remains the object. The only thing that changes is the
> prefix used.

In your example you have replaced the prefix with the -lu-suffix. In
that case, the object remains the same, of course.

What I man was:

vIlegh - I see him
vIleghlu' - he sees me

So, meaning reversed if {-lu'} is added. That's what TKD says:
Those prefixes which normally indicate
first- or second-person /subject/ [...] are used to indicate
first- or second-person /object/.

> You have fallen into the common trap of thinking that Klingon *-lu'*
> maps directly into English passive voice.

I know that and I never said that in my message.

> In which part of this conversation did I said you could
> definitely put a *-lu'* on a pronoun? I said I could see no problem with
> it.

And I said that I do. Each time anyone writes a theoretical possibility
about the grammar, you get upset and tell us not to do that. But if you
set up a theory, you don't accept any contradiction.

Let's just wait for Maltz' answer. There's no reason to keep discussing
about such things if we don't know if it's right or not.


--
Lieven L. Litaer
aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany"
http://www.klingonisch.de
http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Type5VerbSuffixes


More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list