1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Klingon
  4. >
  5. lu' and type-1-suffixes


lu' and type-1-suffixes

So, the verb suffix lu' demands a prefix indicating a 3rd-person-singular-object and both type-1-suffixes demand a prefix indicating no object. However, the null-prefix exists in both of those groups and is valid with all three named suffixes. This made me question: is the null-prefix considered to be always the same prefix or to be different prefixes that happen to have the same form? In other words, setting aside that it would probably not make any sense, could you form a verb in the form 0-(verb)-'egh/chuq-lu' or would this be ungrammatical, because the suffixes used demand different prefixes?
I hope I'm making myself clear and thanks in advance.

May 16, 2019



-lu' means the subject is unspecified. Combining that with -'egh would mean that, whoever the subject is, they're doing it to themselves. Combinging -lu' with -chuq means whoever the subject is, they're doing it to each other.

legh'eghlu' one sees oneself
qIpchuqlu' indefinite subject punches themselves

An indefinite subject doesn't have a number, so I would not expect that last one to be luqIpchuqlu'. The idea that -chuq requires a plural subject doesn't apply, since the subject is indefinite.


Thanks, but I'm not quite sure what you're saying. Is this allowed then? In the case of legh'eghlu', for example, it's not a problem that legh'egh and leghlu' are technically using different prefixes?


The null prefix is the null prefix. I don't see a problem.


Thought it might be one. Thanks for your answer.

Learn Klingon in just 5 minutes a day. For free.