[tlhIngan Hol] using {-lu'} in conjunction with {-ghach}
SuStel
sustel at trimboli.name
Thu Jan 16 07:26:05 PST 2020
On 1/16/2020 10:07 AM, Hugh Son puqloD wrote:
>> On Jan 16, 2020, at 08:59, mayqel qunen'oS<mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> This whole matter*feels* to me like, combining {-lu'} with {-wI'}, thus writing something like {leghlu'wI'}, which I don't*feel* as something actually making sense.
> I’ve heard arguments that something like {leghlu'wI'}*could* mean something like “one that is seen” (i.e., the {-lu'} “flips” {-wI'} so that the formed noun is the object of the verb rather than the subject, much in the way that {-lu'} “flips” prefixes), and I can sort of see the train of thought that leads there, but I am unconvinced that it actually works that way and I am nearly certain it’s not supported by canon.
It isn't.
And this analysis relies on the idea that *-lu'* "flips" the subject of
the verb to the object, when it does no such thing. *-lu'* simply means
the subject is indefinite instead of definite. The object remains the
same. The prefix "flipping" is simply an acknowledgement that, since
there is no subject, the first and only argument to the verb to consider
is the object.
*jIH mulegh HoD*/The captain sees me/ is a sentence with a definite subject.
*jIH vIleghlu'*/Someone indefinite sees me/ describes the same situation
with an indefinite subject. There is no "flipping."
//
English passive voice "flips" the object to the subject, but this is
completely different from Klingon *-lu'.* The grammar of a translation
does not govern the grammar of the original.
--
SuStel
http://trimboli.name
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20200116/23fc1410/attachment.htm>
More information about the tlhIngan-Hol
mailing list