adjectives bearing the {-be'}
I know that we aren't supposed to write "I read (whatever) at boQwI'", but I have to write it, because there I read that.. "the {-be'} can be applied to verbs used as adjectives". However, I have trouble understanding the meaning that the "noun-be verb-{-be'}" would then have. If I write {veng tInqu'Daq} then obviously this means "at the very big city". But if I write {veng tInbe'Daq}, then what would this mean ? "at the not big city" ? or maybe "at the city which isn't big ?". qunnoq
On 7/6/2017 9:03 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
"the {-be'} can be applied to verbs used as adjectives".
However, I have trouble understanding the meaning that the "noun-be verb-{-be'}" would then have.
If I write {veng tInqu'Daq} then obviously this means "at the very big city". But if I write {veng tInbe'Daq}, then what would this mean ? "at the not big city" ? or maybe "at the city which isn't big ?".
Correct. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
On 6 July 2017 at 15:03, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
I know that we aren't supposed to write "I read (whatever) at boQwI'", but I have to write it, because there I read that..
"the {-be'} can be applied to verbs used as adjectives".
Be careful what you put in quotation marks. The quote from {boQwI'} starts from "can". The entries in {boQwI'} are annotated with sources, and I'd rather you quoted the sources directly instead. {boQwI'} is not meant to replace these sources, only help you find them more quickly. -- De'vID
De'vID:
Be careful what you put in quotation marks. The quote from {boQwI'} starts from "can".
I saw that when I was writing the original post, but I chose to include the "the {-be'}" in the quotation for reasons of clarity, because after all it doesn't alter the meaning. De'vID:
The entries in {boQwI'} are annotated with sources, and I'd rather you quoted the sources directly instead. {boQwI'} is not meant to replace these sources, only help you find them more quickly.
Indeed you're right, and since we have discussed this in the past, I try to quote the original sources. But in the case of this thread, I couldn't find in the tkd the part which wrote, that the {-be'} can be placed to verbs used as adjectives. mayqel On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 1:18 AM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
On 6 July 2017 at 15:03, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
I know that we aren't supposed to write "I read (whatever) at boQwI'", but I have to write it, because there I read that..
"the {-be'} can be applied to verbs used as adjectives".
Be careful what you put in quotation marks. The quote from {boQwI'} starts from "can".
The entries in {boQwI'} are annotated with sources, and I'd rather you quoted the sources directly instead. {boQwI'} is not meant to replace these sources, only help you find them more quickly.
-- De'vID _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
Am 07.07.2017 um 08:46 schrieb mayqel qunenoS:
I saw that when I was writing the original post, but I chose to include the "the {-be'}" in the quotation for reasons of clarity, because after all it doesn't alter the meaning.
Nevertheless, this is important when quoting whatever, because it always changes the meaning somehow, or with other words, a quote MUST be exact: Just write: boQwI's mentions that -be' "can be applied to verbs used as adjectives".
The entries in {boQwI'} are annotated with sources, and I'd rather you quoted the sources directly instead. {boQwI'} is not meant to replace these sources, only help you find them more quickly.
True, boQwI' isn't a source, per definition.
couldn't find in the tkd the part which wrote, that the {-be'} can be placed to verbs used as adjectives.
Actually, it really isn't mentioned in TKD (or I cant find it). -- Lieven L. Litaer aka Quvar valer 'utlh Grammarian of the KLI http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher http://www.klingonwiki.net
lieven:
Actually, it really isn't mentioned in TKD (or I cant find it).
Thank you ! My point exactly.. qunnoq On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Lieven <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 07.07.2017 um 08:46 schrieb mayqel qunenoS:
I saw that when I was writing the original post, but I chose to include the "the {-be'}" in the quotation for reasons of clarity, because after all it doesn't alter the meaning.
Nevertheless, this is important when quoting whatever, because it always changes the meaning somehow, or with other words, a quote MUST be exact: Just write:
boQwI's mentions that -be' "can be applied to verbs used as adjectives".
The entries in {boQwI'} are annotated with sources, and I'd rather you quoted the sources directly instead. {boQwI'} is not meant to replace these sources, only help you find them more quickly.
True, boQwI' isn't a source, per definition.
couldn't find in the tkd the part which wrote, that the {-be'} can be placed to verbs used as adjectives.
Actually, it really isn't mentioned in TKD (or I cant find it).
-- 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
On 7/7/2017 3:23 AM, Lieven wrote:
couldn't find in the tkd the part which wrote, that the {-be'} can be placed to verbs used as adjectives.
Actually, it really isn't mentioned in TKD (or I cant find it).
It's not in TKD. We've gotten it in examples. The one I can think of off the top of my head is *wa'maH yIHmey lI'be'*/ten useless tribbles/ (CK). We've also gotten *-Ha'* in examples: *Duj ngaDHa'*///unstable vessel (person who is out of control)/ (KGT). -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
SuStel:
We've also gotten -Ha' in examples: Duj ngaDHa' unstable vessel (person who is out of control) (KGT).
The question is, is this {Duj ngaDHa'} a permission to freely add the {-Ha'} to verbs used as adjectives ? On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 4:38 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
On 7/7/2017 3:23 AM, Lieven wrote:
couldn't find in the tkd the part which wrote, that the {-be'} can be placed to verbs used as adjectives.
Actually, it really isn't mentioned in TKD (or I cant find it).
It's not in TKD. We've gotten it in examples. The one I can think of off the top of my head is wa'maH yIHmey lI'be' ten useless tribbles (CK).
We've also gotten -Ha' in examples: Duj ngaDHa' unstable vessel (person who is out of control) (KGT).
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On 7/7/2017 10:20 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
SuStel:
We've also gotten -Ha' in examples: Duj ngaDHa' unstable vessel (person who is out of control) (KGT). The question is, is this {Duj ngaDHa'} a permission to freely add the {-Ha'} to verbs used as adjectives ?
I believe there are other examples. I take it as confirmation that adding *-Ha'* to adjectival verbs is allowed. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
There are. E.g. {HopHa’}: Daq HopHa’Daq qa’chaj nejlI’ qotar Qempa’QeH je Not far away, Kotar and his Qempa'keh, are in search for their souls. PB --Voragh On Behalf Of SuStel Sent: Friday, July 07, 2017 9:23 AM On 7/7/2017 10:20 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote: SuStel: We've also gotten -Ha' in examples: Duj ngaDHa' unstable vessel (person who is out of control) (KGT). The question is, is this {Duj ngaDHa'} a permission to freely add the {-Ha'} to verbs used as adjectives ? I believe there are other examples. I take it as confirmation that adding -Ha' to adjectival verbs is allowed.
participants (5)
-
De'vID -
Lieven -
mayqel qunenoS -
Steven Boozer -
SuStel