<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 3/25/2017 9:39 AM, Felix Malmenbeck
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:1490449162817.2015@kth.se" type="cite">
<p>== DISCUSSION ONLY ==</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>> We can say <strong>DorDI' Hogh</strong> and we generally
accept <strong>taghDI' Hogh,</strong></p>
<p>> so I'm not devastated by this lack. (I wouldn't mind a
verb for<em><br>
</em></p>
<p><em>> begin [a period of time does this]</em>.)<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>There is quite a lot of canon support for {tagh} having a dual
syntax:<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><strong>tagh </strong>[event]. = "[Event] begins."</p>
<p>[event] <strong>tagh</strong> [agent]. = "[Agent] starts
[event]."</p>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>I'm not referring to dual syntax; I mean <b>tagh</b> is glossed
<i>begin a process, initiate,</i> which might suggest that it
refers only to processes or events, not to time periods. All of
the examples of <b>tagh</b> you provided refer to events or
processes, except possibly <strong>tagh HarghchuqmeH poH,</strong>
which is a time period defined by an event. The question is, does
a week "start a process, initiate"?<br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</body>
</html>