[tlhIngan Hol] {mej} with and without {-vo'}

[Alan Anderson]

On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 8:15 AM D qunen'oS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:

> Also, reading the original post, I noticed this Ca'Non sentence:
>
> {lojmItmeyvo’ Damejta’}
>
> This sentence shows that a {-vo'}ed noun *can* be the object of a verb,
> something which -for reasons I don't know- I was under the impression that
> wasn't possible. Perhaps because I could never come up with an example
> where it would be necessary for a {-vo'}ed noun to be the object of a verb.
> Who knows? Go figure.
>

The object of {Damejta'} in this sentence is {ghe'tor}. Don't try to read
so much into something when you aren't paying attention to the context.

-- ghunchu'wI'
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20220525/6d2931d8/attachment-0016.htm>