<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 7/29/2020 7:50 PM, De'vID wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CA+7zAmOcNF+YysM2REh1UTucEA=Q-=_nvGk-0+09h7yQLrqFHw@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 at
19:36, SuStel <<a href="mailto:sustel@trimboli.name"
moz-do-not-send="true">sustel@trimboli.name</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div>And when has it been proven that you can't use <b>-laH</b>
on an adjectivally acting verb? I don't think you can,
but I don't think it's ever been proven to be so.<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br clear="all">
<div>Surely, this is forbidden by this sentence in TKD 4.4: "If
a Type 5 noun suffix is used (section 3.3.5), it follows the
verb, which, when used to modify the noun in this way, can
have no other suffix except the rover {-qu'} /emphatic/. The
Type 5 noun suffix follows {-qu'}."</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>We now know that the exception to the rule should really
have been something like "except any rover other than {Qo'}",
because we've seen {-be'} ({wa'maH yIHmey lI'be'} from PK) and
{-Ha'} ({Duj ngaDHa'} from KGT) used on a verb acting as an
adjective following a noun, but we have no reason to believe
that the rule as stated is wrong about non-rover suffixes.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Well, yes, but we've never been given such a rule, and have had
to suppose that this is the correct rule. I could imagine, for
instance, that the rule is to allow any suffix that doesn't stop
the verb from expressing pure quality. For instance, <b>loD
Quchba'</b><i> obviously happy man</i> seems to make perfect
sense. I'm not saying that's the rule, just that it's another
possible rule.</p>
<p>So when we got the <b>-be'</b> and <b>-Ha'</b> exceptions to
the adjectival rule, it's because we saw them in the wild, without
explanation. Those don't prove a rule; they just show us
additional allowed suffixes.</p>
<p>I take the point that there IS a rule given to us, but the rule
is clearly incomplete.<br>
</p>
<p>Anyway, even if we suppose Okrand added a <b>-laH</b> to an
adjectival verb before deciding he shouldn't have done that, what
sentence did he do that in that called for retrofitting? It would
have to be something already published, otherwise he wouldn't have
needed to retrofit it. The only sentences that came out before TKD
are the ones in <i>Star Trek III,</i> neglecting the clipped
one-word commands of the original Star Trek movie, and <b>lo'laH</b>
does not appear to be used in any of them.<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>