Am 06.07.2017 um 21:07 schrieb SuStel:
There sure is an example against this:
I was talking abut canon phrases as an example.
TKD's explicit pronouncement that *-be' *is not used with imperatives.
true.
Maybe Okrand meant it only can't be used to negate the sense of /do this!/ but he didn't say that.
That how I read it: commands are "do it" and to say "don't" use {-Qo'}
What we can be sure of is that {HIleghmoHbe'} is forbidden, because the -be' negates the command {HIleghmoH}, so we need -Qo' here.
So how about **yIta'vIpbe'?*
What about it? It seems clear to me: yIta'vIpQo'
TKD doesn't say you replace *-be'* with *-Qo'.*
It doesn't use the verb "replace", but it says
/The suffix {-be'} cannot be used with imperative verbs. For imperatives, the following suffix is required: {-Qo'} "don't!, won't"/
It makes perfect, logical sense. But it's forbidden by TKD. Until such time as Okrand gives us an unambiguous example,
True.
After some thinking about that, I believe the problem is not so much within the -be' suffix, but more with the -moH. We have had problems with that already when it comes to direct objects (cf. yIghojmoH)
TKD says that be' cannot be used with "imperative verbs". Now taking this literally, I think that we have looked at the -moH part too closely. When giving a negative command, Qo' is used, but a verb with -moH makes it two "verbs" (or actions), where the "cause" is seen as an action, and this one is not negative.
Well, nevertheless, we won't know without asking Maltz.
--
Lieven L. Litaer
aka Quvar valer 'utlh
Grammarian of the KLI
http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher
http://www.klingonwiki.net
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org