On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 10:02 PM janSIy . <kenjutsuka@live.com> wrote:
If you read "meH'ed noun" as representing a "verb with -meH preceding a noun that it is modifying", then the verb before it could represent the main verb of the sentence. In other words, I suspect he meant, what you would have preferred to be written as: adverb - verbbogh 'ej verbbogh noun - verb - verbmeH'ed noun
Well, sure, if you add that extra unsuffixed verb in there as a main verb then it works fine. But, as I said, without it there isn't a main verb. Two of the three in the original "template" have -bogh, and the other has -meH, so a fourth verb is necessary to make it a sentence. On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 11:13 AM SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
I had no trouble at all understanding what "meH'ed noun" meant. What else COULD it mean? I'd say the same thing myself if I had need of it.
It doesn't mean anything sensible to me. You've left off the word that the -meH is being connected to. We should all know that -meH is a *verb* suffix and doesn't fit on nouns. But what I read -- and what I'm still reading -- is "verb-meH'ed noun". The "'ed" is confusing, but after the subsequent explanation I understand it to mean a verb with -meH modifying the noun. -- ghunchu'wI'