> This was translated by Lieven. I believe the use of {mev} here is an error, and should've been {mevmoH}.

{mev} can take an object, so it works. {bIjatlh 'e' yImev} is in both TKD and PK.

Yes, but the suggestion is that perhaps mev can only take 'e' (and maybe net, I suppose) as an object. Any other time, it's the subject that stops doing something. It seems like the meaning of mev changes when its object is 'e'.

Whether this is true, I don't know. But you can conform to canon by following the suggestion.

{mev} also appears six times in paq'batlh, and takes {'e'} as an object each time.

There is also the sentence {not mev peghmey} from PK. It could be that this {mev} could be given an explicit object, such as {not {vIH/vI'/chuS/leng/bogh/vuQ} 'e' lumev peghmev}, or it could be that {mev} has a homonymous intransitive form that is similar to {Dor}.

Except the translation is Secrets never cease, which makes it clear that it's the peghmey that are doing something not to be stopped; they're not causing something else not to be stopped.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name