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

[SuStel]

On 7/8/2019 2:23 AM, Lieven L. Litaer wrote:
> Am 07.07.2019 um 23:15 schrieb SuStel:
>> We clearly don't all know, since Lieven claimed that *-lu'* "reverse the
>> object-subject."
>
> I can't leave this uncommented in the archives, as it seems I am saying
> something completely wrong. TKD says clearly:
> Those prefixes which normally indicate
> first- or second-person /subject/ [...] are used to indicate
> first- or second-person /object/.
>
> This means that when {-lu'} is added to a verb with such a prefix, then
> O-S-meaning of that phrase is reversed. All examples show that, and
> there's not need to deny:
>
> {Daqaw} - "you remember it" (you = subject)
> {Daqawlu'} - "indefinite subject remembers you" (you = object)
>
> {vIyaj} - "I understand it" (I = subject)
> {vIyajlu'} - "indefinite subject understands ME" (I = object)
>
> {wIlegh} "we see it/him" (we = subject)
> {wIleghlu'} "indefinite subject sees us" (we = object)
>
> etc.

TKD does not present the non*-lu'* forms that you put here. TKD never 
compares two verbs with the same prefix, one without *-lu'* and one with.

And this is because TKD is not presenting *-lu'* as a suffix that moves 
the subject to the object position, and it certainly doesn't say it 
moves an object to the subject position. It just says that using *-lu'* 
means there is no subject, and you use a special set of prefixes to 
indicate the object. There's no reversal going on.


>
>> My point is to show that the subject and object aren't
>> "in" the prefix; the prefix simply agrees with them.
>
> That's basically the same. When I see {qa-} I can certainly read what is
> object and subject. So it really is "in" the prefix. You are just
> nitpicking here on the definition. It's chicken or the egg thing.

Nope, not nitpicking. Your analysis of *-lu'* leads you to one 
conclusion about the original question; mine leads me to another. There 
is a significant difference being described.

When you see *qa-,* you are being told what the subject and object ARE, 
even if you can't see the subject and object.

    Klingon grammarians refer to the rule that governs the use of
    pronominal prefixes as the rule of *rom* (literally, "accord").
    Grammarians of Federation Standard and many Earth languages call the
    phenomenon "agreement." Thus, in the case of Klingon, the prefix
    used must "agree" with the noun to which it refers; if the object
    noun is plural, for example, the prefix must be one that is used
    with plural objects.

Prefixes agree with the noun arguments of the verb, not the other way 
around.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190708/6e2c3796/attachment.htm>