[tlhIngan Hol] does the {-ta'} leave room for interpretation for the {-pu'} ?

[mayqel qunen'oS]

De'vID:
> I'd understand {qaqIpta'be'} as "I didn't hit you", with the implication
> that I deliberately did not hit you. The {-be'} negates the completion
> or accomplishment, not the intentionality.

I'm afraid I can't understand that. Lets take things from the start,
ignoring the initial question of this thread.

qaqIpta'
I set out to hit you and did it

(qaqIpta')be'
(I set out to hit you and did it)-not

Meaning that "no intentional hitting took place", and not
"intentionally, no hitting took place"; now, whether this would leave
room for interpretation that "unintentional hitting could have taken
place", which was the original question of this thread, is another
story.

The only way I can see the "I deliberately did not hit you" meaning
being produced is by writing {qaqIpbe'ta'}:

qaqIpbe'
I don't hit you

(qaqIpbe')ta'
I set out not to hit you and I accomplished it = I deliberately did not hit you

Let alone the fact that there is another problem with interpreting the
{qaqIpta'be'} as "I deliberately did not hit you"; doing so would call
for the "deliberate action described by the {-ta'}" to be acting on
the {-be'} which follows it.

However, if we go here: https://www.qephom.de/e/message_from_maltz_140624.html

We will see that maltz has said:

*** quote start ***

"For the possessive suffixes, however, this doesn't work. {jaghna'lI'}
means "definitely your enemy (and not your friend, etc.)." It doesn't
specifically mean "definitely your enemy (and not mine)."

He said if you want to emphasize the possessor, just give it extra
stress when saying the word: {DujlIj} (or DujlIj or DujlIj or DujlIj
or DujLIJ or however you want to transcribe it -- I'm not sure whether
italics and bold and all of that will show up for you)."

*** quote end ***

Seemingly/apparently, suffixes can act only on the suffixes preceding
them, and not on the suffixes following them, which would be necessary
to happen for the {qaqIpta'be'} to be meaning "I deliberately did not
hit you". On the other hand though, one *could* argue, that maltz
talks about noun suffixes.. But still..

Now, don't misunderstand me; in no way am I saying that I'm correct in
the way I understand this matter. Chances are that I'm wrong (as
usual..).

I'm just describing how I understand this, hoping that if indeed I'm
wrong, someone will explain to me, what it is I'm actually failing to
understand.

~ mayqel qunen'oS