tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Apr 24 16:39:48 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Adverbial Concepts
On Mon, 24 Apr 1995, William H. Martin wrote:
> According to R.B Franklin:
> > It it true that an adverbial may come after an object noun, when it is
> > topicalized with the suffix {-'e'}.
>
> While I won't declare this wrong, I've never noticed this done,
> except in discussion on this list with descriptions about how
> OTHER languages handle topicalizations. Here, discussion
> concluded that Okrand seems to have misnamed this grammatical
> entity, since he never uses it as a true topicalizer in his
> examples, but instead uses it as a form of emphasis.
[...]
> Meanwhile, placing an object before an adverbial is different
> enough that I would expect to remember it as an outstanding
> exception. Would you mind citing the canon or rule on this?
I'm only using the term "topicalize" because that's what TKD calls it.
Personally, I would call this suffix an "emphatic", but I wanted to use
the same terminology the TKD uses so folks can understand what I talking
about.
This unusual exception is from TKD, Sec. 6.7. From reading the
accompanying text, it's obvious that the sentence contains a typo and
instead of {HaqwI' 'e' DaH yISam} it should read {HaqwI''e' DaH yISam}.
Here, the direct object {HaqwI'} has been "topicalized" with {-'e'}
and placed before the adverbial {DaH}. This, of course, is a rare
exception to the normal word order which dictates that an adverbial
should come before the object.
> > yoDtargh
>
> charghwI'
yoDtargh