tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Aug 08 22:54:29 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: }} {-wI'} on sentences
- From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
- Subject: Re: }} {-wI'} on sentences
- Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 21:54:29 -0500
gheyIl writes:
>I believe that Okrand intended {-wI'} to be used to turn a verb into
>a noun - i.e. the thing which is doing the action which the verb
>describes. In other words, the subject of said verb.
Yes. TKD 3.2.2 is pretty clear that this is indeed the intent.
>Now, if the
>subject is explicitly stated by use of a prefix (even the null 3rd
>person prefix), then {-wI'} is redundant, or worse, confusing.
>This does not preclude the use of other suffices:
>{tlhutlhtaHwI'=a drunk; chISmoHwI'=bleach} (no! not that again!)
Sure, though I don't find this explicit anywhere in TKD.
>I might be convinced that the verb in question could have
>an object, but then it would seem an awful lot like a N-N
>construction, although not a "possessive" construction.
My argument exactly: it SEEMS like a N-N construction, but because N-N is
supposed to be simply "possessive", it makes sense to consider instead that
{-wI'} can act on a verb which has an object.
-- ghunchu'wI'