On 28 July 2016 at 08:45, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
read this :
Qo'noS tuqmey muvchuqmoH qeylIS kahless united the tribes of kronos
..good for him ; but for the rest of us, why the {muvchuqmoH} takes an object ?
according to tkd, when the {-chuq} suffix is used, the verb prefix must indicate "no object". that is the word which bears the {-chuq} can't take an object. the ones that are {-chuq"ed"}, must be the recipients of each others actions. they can't {-chuq} each other, and then all of them together {-chuq} someone else too.
now, perhaps this sentence stands because we have the {-moH}, on the {muvchuq} ; but even so, I can't bring myself to *feeling* the combined meaning of {-chuq} {-moH} with that of a subject too.
That's exactly it: {-chuq} and {-moH} together. Consider any verb which doesn't take an object, say {jor}. {jor bIH} "they explode" {bIH vIjormoH} "I explode them", "I cause them to explode" The same thing is happening here with {muvchuq}. {muvchuq chaH} "they join each other" {chaH vImuvchuq} "I unite them", "I cause them to join each other" It's a fairly straightforward interaction of two verb suffixes. -- De'vID