[tlhIngan Hol] intransitivity

[kechpaja at kechpaja.com]

I'd also assume that if someone doesn't know what "transitive" and 
"intransitive" mean, they're also relatively unlikely to have a good 
sense of what it means for a verb to take an object or not, so you'd 
have to explain what you were talking about anyway. In both cases you're 
going to have to include an explanation somewhere, so you might as well 
use the shorter, less bulky term. 

On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 11:47:15AM +0000, PICHLMANN Christoph wrote:
>I agree with SuStel below. Use transitive/intransitive and link to a definition. A single word is less to read than a sentence, and once you know the meaning you don't need more.
>If you don't know the meaning, you have the link to explain it.
>
>Bonus: you can add a more detailed explanation of what it means with regard to klingon, and how it is determined/verified that the verb is either.
>
>Christoph
>
>---------------------
>
>Message: 7
>Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2020 12:21:46 -0500
>From: SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name>
>To: tlhingan-hol at lists.kli.org
>Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] intransitivity
>Message-ID: <75f7f2fa-4669-9fb9-f809-0021c3d3b95f at trimboli.name>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
>
>>On 2/22/2020 12:18 PM, Lieven L. Litaer wrote:
>>> Am 22.02.2020 um 18:02 schrieb SuStel:
>>>> Web-based dictionaries will use either version.
>>>
>>> I know, that's why I wondered which one would be preferred.
>>
>>Use transitive/intransitive, but link those words with hyperlinks to an
>>explanation of transitivity (M-W does this).
>>
>>--
>>SuStel
>_______________________________________________
>tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
>tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org
>http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org