[tlhIngan Hol] using {-lu'} in conjunction with {-ghach}

mayqel qunen'oS mihkoun at gmail.com
Thu Jan 16 06:58:21 PST 2020

> This is an old question. I think the
> combination is meaningless. If it meant
> anything at all, it would probably be
> action taken by someone unspecified, but
> I don't think it really means that.

ok thanks.

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.

(but I may be wrong, and if I am, please do correct me..)

> My intuition is someone was just trying
> to get around the prohibition against
> using -ghach on suffixless verbs by
> tossing -lu‘ on there since it wouldn’t
> really change the meaning.


I thought of this too, while initially reading the {vanglu'ghach}.

Seeing it, reminded me of the "grammarian's desk", where krankor wrote (if
I remember correctly) that one could use the combination of {-neS} with
{-ghach}, as a way to get around the prohibition of using {-ghach} on
suffixless verbs.

Although, I never actually bought that argument.. I didn't feel it actually
making sense.

~ mayqel qunen'oS
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20200116/bebf3016/attachment-0002.htm>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list