On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 5:36 PM, David Holt <kenjutsuka@live.com> wrote:

I have a project I'm working on and I would like to figure out the most efficient way to elicit the image of rendered fat as a thing. Is {tlhag} the subject of {'Im} and thus {'Impu'wI'} might work? Or is {tlhag} the object of {'Im} and thus we might have to go with the unwieldy {tlhagh 'Imlu'pu'bogh}? What about {-wI'} with {-lu'} - {'Imlu'pu'wI'}?

Jeremy

Oh, boy, the {-lu'} plus {-wI'} thing again! I so wish MO would finally rule on this, since it's immediately obvious to some this combination nominalizes the same way as "-ee" in "employee," but others regard the construction as grammatical gibberish, and they seem to have convinced most to avoid using it. (I can't help but suspect the difficulty with {-lu'} plus {-wI'} has a lot to do with a programming background, since the objection is often phrased as "I can't make that mean anything," which sounds a lot like a compiler error to me.)

"Boil" can take an object or not, of course, but the online OED gives only transitive definitions for "render":

"Melt down (fat) in order to clarify it.

‘the fat was being cut up and rendered for lard’

Process (the carcass of an animal) in order to extract proteins, fats, and other usable parts.

‘the rendered down remains of sheep’ "

So I'd expect {tlhag} is the object of {'Im}. 'ej bIjatlhchugh <'Imlu'pu'wI'>, vay' 'Imlu'pu'bogh 'oH 'e' SIbI' vIyaj.

~mIp'av