Am 23.01.2018 um 09:54 schrieb mayqel qunenoS:
If I wrote {Soplu'be'}, then what would this mean ? "not someone unspecified eats" ? And if I want to say "not someone unspecified eats", then why not just write {Sop (subject)} ?
Because you can't say "subject" if the subject is not known, and that's what {-lu'} is used for. Compare these following phrases: {chab Sop targh} "The targ eats the pie" This is clear who ate it. {chab Soplu'} "Some unknown subject eats the pie" or "the pie is eaten". This can be used to describe a half pie standing on the table during the party: You say that it is being eaten, but you did not observe who ate it. It's kind of a general expression, "This is a pie that has been eaten by someone" {chab Sop vay'} "Somebody eats (or has eaten) the pie" Talking about the same pie on the party table. This could be used to describe an observed action: You see "somebody" eting the pie. Even in past tense, you may say "someone ate the pie". But still that's a definite subject, it's different from {-lu'}. Adding a negation turns {chab Soplu'} into {chab Soplu'be'}, negating the entire phrase [Soplu']. You say this when sou discover that the pie on the table is left untouched. Nobody tried from it. --- Next, we may discuss the difference in the word order, hence {-be'lu'}. This is certaily dependant on the verb, for instance look at {legh}. When negating {legh} you get a verb that can be something like "being blind". I understand {leghbe'lu'} as "one is doing some not-seeing" as opposed to {leghlu'be'} "the act of seeing does not happen". This actually works with {Sop} as well, when you think of {Sopbe'} a verb of refusing to eat (like in a hunger strike) or if somebody wants to loose weight. Go to a weight atchers meeting, then you can say {naDev Sopbe'lu'}. The cake standing there has been {Soplu'be'}. THAT's the difference. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.de http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/StarTrekDiscovery