Am 07.07.2019 um 19:35 schrieb SuStel:
With all that, there's little difficulty in interpreting *-lu'* on a pronoun: the topic noun has been made indefinite.
When you explain it that way, it makes sense.
We know that -lu' reverse the object-subject,
FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THAT IS GOOD AND HOLY, NO IT DOESN'T! Everyone needs to unlearn this falsehood immediately. [...] The object always remains the object. The only thing that changes is the prefix used.
In your example you have replaced the prefix with the -lu-suffix. In that case, the object remains the same, of course. What I man was: vIlegh - I see him vIleghlu' - he sees me So, meaning reversed if {-lu'} is added. That's what TKD says: Those prefixes which normally indicate first- or second-person /subject/ [...] are used to indicate first- or second-person /object/.
You have fallen into the common trap of thinking that Klingon *-lu'* maps directly into English passive voice.
I know that and I never said that in my message.
In which part of this conversation did I said you could definitely put a *-lu'* on a pronoun? I said I could see no problem with it.
And I said that I do. Each time anyone writes a theoretical possibility about the grammar, you get upset and tell us not to do that. But if you set up a theory, you don't accept any contradiction. Let's just wait for Maltz' answer. There's no reason to keep discussing about such things if we don't know if it's right or not. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.de http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Type5VerbSuffixes