SuStel:

> This is an old question. I think the 

> combination is meaningless. If it meant 

> anything at all, it would probably be 

> action taken by someone unspecified, but

> I don't think it really means that.

ok thanks.

This whole matter *feels* to me like, combining {-lu'} with {-wI'}, thus writing something like {leghlu'wI'}, which I don't *feel* as something actually making sense.

(but I may be wrong, and if I am, please do correct me..)

jevreH:

> My intuition is someone was just trying 

> to get around the prohibition against 

> using -ghach on suffixless verbs by 

> tossing -lu‘ on there since it wouldn’t 

> really change the meaning.

Yeah..

I thought of this too, while initially reading the {vanglu'ghach}.

Seeing it, reminded me of the "grammarian's desk", where krankor wrote (if I remember correctly) that one could use the combination of {-neS} with {-ghach}, as a way to get around the prohibition of using {-ghach} on suffixless verbs.

Although, I never actually bought that argument.. I didn't feel it actually making sense.

~ mayqel qunen'oS