I’d suggest that similar to {qeylIS’e’ lIjlaHbe’bogh vay’}, all of these would have been better formed with {-bogh} and {vay’}.

pItlh

charghwI’ ‘utlh
(ghaH, ghaH, -Daj)




On Oct 27, 2021, at 11:02 AM, Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu> wrote:

It’s been done, but rarely and never by Okrand AFAIK.  I found only 5 more examples in my notes:
 
*chellu'wI'          addendum, appendix [Qov]
*leghbe'lu'wI'    unseen (one) [GILGAMESH]
*ngoHlu'wI'        Christ (“anointed one”), messiah [KBTP]
*poQlu'wI'          defendant (i.e. litigant in lawsuit) [source?]
*rachlu'wI'          Augment (i.e. genetically enhanced) [source?]
 

--
Voragh

____________________________________________________________

From: tlhIngan-Hol On Behalf Of mayqel qunen'oS

> ruplu'wI' tax payer 
> ("one who is taxed") (source?)

 

I think that although grammar-wise there's nothing which prohibits the simultaneous use of {-lu'} and {-wI'}, we usually don't do it for reason(s) I don't remember.

I'm just writing this so as to prevent any beginner(s) from developing a habit of writing {-lu'wI'}.

 

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