[tlhIngan Hol] prefix trick with {-'egh} and {-chuq}

mayqel qunen'oS mihkoun at gmail.com
Mon Jul 6 05:42:38 PDT 2020

Before I start, let me say that when it comes to the suffixes {-'egh}
and {-chuq}, I still don't understand how it is possible, that when
they are used there is an object. According to our sacred scripture:

{-egh} <oneself>
This suffix is used to indicate that the action described by the verb
affects the performer of the action, the subject. It is translated by
English <self.> When this suffix is used, the prefix set indicating
"no object" must also be used.


{-chuq} <one another>
This suffix is used only with plural subjects. It is translated <each
other> or <one another.> The prefix set indicating "no object" is also
used when this suffix is used.

According to the above, when {-'egh} and {-chuq} are used there is a
subject, but how is it possible that there isn't an object as well ?
In the {-'egh} case isn't the subject the object as well ? And in the
{-chuq} case isn't the other party the object ?

Whatever.. Now let's leave aside the {-'egh} and {-chuq}, and concern
ourselves with the prefix trick..

The prefix trick is to be used by first and second person objects
(singular or plural), because otherwise ambiguity arises. Example:

taj qanobpu'
I gave you the knife

taj nunobpu'
he/they gave us the knife

But if we used a third person object..

taj lunobpu'
they gave the knife
they gave him the knife

taj vInobpu'
I gave the knife
I gave him the knife
I gave them the knife

Now let's forget the above and come to the question of this post.

Couldn't we use the prefix trick with {-'egh} and {-chuq} ? I don't
see a way any ambiguity could appear.

taj jInob'eghpu'
I gave myself a knife

taj nob'eghpu'
he gave himself a knife
they gave themselves a knife

taj Sunobchuqpu'
you gave each other a knife

taj nobchuqpu'
they gave each other a knife

So, why couldn't we use the prefix trick with the {-'egh} and {-chuq} ?

~ Qa'yIn

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list