Hi Alan,

>
>
>Am I on the right track here? It seems to me then that the deciding factor
>is whether the compound can be applied to the referent with "is" or rather
>it is implied that this is a quality of the person and in this case would
>have to take " have" for example.

Yes I think you're on the right track. Here are some quick examples... what kinds of compounds are these, as applied to 'moon':

Moon: 1) cool-beam, 2) night-brightener, 3) elf-loved





1) bahubbiihi: that whose beams are cool
(the moon _has_ cool beams)
2) tappurisa 6 (gen), noun: brightener of the night
(the moon _is_ a brightener)
3) tappurisa 3 (inst), adj: loved by elves
(the moon _is_ loved)

Note that 'cool-beam' isn't idiomatic in English except in the subject position or vocative. i.e. you could address the moon, "hey cool-beam", or say "cool-beam up there is looking spotty". But you can't say "the moon is cool-beam" like you can in Pali. For the latter in English we can form 'bahubbiihis' with the suffix -ed. "The moon is cool-beamed". This works because English is productive with regards to producing new verbs from nouns. So you 'invent' a verb, in passive participle form 'be beamed', meaning to possess beams. 'To be handed' = 'to possess hands' etc. 'Empty-handed' = 'he is possessed of empty hands', 'his hands are empty' etc.

best regards,

/Rett