On Fri, 17 May 2019 at 20:51, mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't understand a word of this.. Can you say it with simpler words ?
What exactly didn't you understand? I'll try to express what {ghunchu'wI'} wrote in a different way:
ghunchu'wI':
In my internalized model of how {Hoch X} works,
"According to my beliefs about how {Hoch} works when it comes before a noun..."
the alternative {Hoch vIghro' luleghlu'}
"the other way to write the sentence (i.e., other than {Hoch vIghro'mey luleghlu'}), namely, to drop the {-mey} suffix and write it as {Hoch vIghro' luleghlu'}..."
violates a kind of {rom}.
"breaks the rule that the verb prefix {lu-}, which when used with {-lu'} means that the object is plural, has to agree with the actual object..." The plural indication
of the verb prefix isn’t strong enough to coerce {Hoch vIghro'} into meaning {Hoch vIghro'mey}.
"because while normally, when the object doesn't have a plural suffix it could be either singular or plural, and thus the verb prefix could force its means to become plural (since both interpretations are equally strong otherwise), in the case of {Hoch vIghro'}, because {Hoch vIghro'} and {Hoch vIghro'mey} mean different things, the verb prefix isn't strong enough to overcome this difference." Does that help? That's how I understood it. Possibly {ghunchu'wI'} meant something different, in which case he can clarify it himself. I thought what he wrote was fairly easy to understand, and my explanation actually makes it more complicated. -- De'vID