SuStel:

> Show me a text you want to translate that you think runs 

> into an irreconcilable -lu'/laH clash.

I'm afraid you misunderstood me.

The problem (or at least my problem..), isn't that I come across the need to say "someone who is unable", and can't find the way to say it, without breaking the -lu'/-laH rule.

The problem is, that if I start the passage writing e.g. {vumlu'taHvIS, 'ej Doy'qu'lu'taHvIS, qeqnISlu'chugh..}, and suddenly I need to say "but he is unable to train", I would then need to switch off the -lu', to some other solution.

Perhaps I would say {qeqlaHbe'}, {qeqlaHbe' vay'}, {qeqlaHbe' nuv}, {qeqlaHbe' vumqu'wI'}, etc.

But doing so, I would have to switch from talking about someone "unspecified", to someone "specified".

Now, don't ask me what the actual difference is, between the "someone" described by the -lu', and the "someone" described by the vay'. In greek we don't have something similar, so I can't *feel* the difference between the two.

But I think sometime in the past, it had been said in a discussion on the -lu', that once someone starts using in a long passage the -lu', then it would be preferable if he didn't use -lu' and -vay' (or some other solution) interchangeably.

~ changan qIj