On Jul 9, 2020, at 3:10 AM, mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:

SuStel:

We have insufficient information to draw any firm conclusions.

janSIy:

I don't support the use of the Type 1 suffixes to refer to the indirect object at this time.

De'vID:

I can see no evidence for this claim based on what you're written above.

ok, thanks ! I didn't expect that things would be so complicated.

Although, even if we could use the prefix trick with {-'eghmoH} and
{-chuqmoH} I wouldn't use it since it is disturbingly similar to
greek/english.

In any case though, it's good to discuss what can and cannot be done,
so thanks for your replies, which (prefix trick aside) furthered my
understanding in what is the actual meaning of {-'eghmoH} and
{-chuqmoH}.

~ Qa'yIn
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org