<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 8/3/2017 10:32 AM, mayqel qunenoS
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAP7F2cKO=dfCCnhF21wWFR_bHCbiuYRL=qbWPr6y-feMPKYL8A@mail.gmail.com">In
tkd {HeghmoH} is given as "be fatal".
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Does this mean that whenever someone uses it, he
*has* to use it in order to say that "something is fatal" ? And
thus only use it as a be verb ?</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Can't someone use it in order to say
"something/someone caused something/someone to die" ? And so use
it in a transitive way ?</div>
</blockquote>
<p>I don't think <b>HeghmoH</b> is a "be" verb.</p>
<p>I think <b>HeghmoH</b> is a sort of passive version of <b>HoH.
HoH</b> says <i>this thing does this.</i> <b>HeghmoH</b> is
more like <i>he's dead because of this thing.</i> This is just my
gut feeling on the matter, not a rule.</p>
<p>You could say <b>HeghmoH tar</b><i> poison is fatal,</i> but you
couldn't say <b>*tar HeghmoH</b> <i>fatal poison.</i></p>
<p>If a first officer assassinates a captain for weakness, you'd say
<b>HoD HoH yaS wa'DIch</b><i> the first officer kills the captain,</i>
not <b>HoD HeghmoH yaS wa'DIch</b><i> the first officer is fatal
to the captain,</i> even though the sentence is perfectly
grammatical. Again, this is just my opinion.<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>