tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Aug 24 16:00:04 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: }} Dancing. was Re: Klin to Bermuda
- From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: }} Dancing. was Re: Klin to Bermuda
- Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 16:00:04 -0400
>From: [email protected]
>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 1995 19:56:52 -0400
>~markvo':
>>I tend to view the difference between a compound word and a
>>noun-noun construction to be very small, if present at all.
>I disagree strongly. I think there's a sharp difference. There appears to
>be some overlap, I admit, but there are some canon uses of compound nouns
>which could not be meaningful as N1-N2 constructions (construct states).
Ow! I didn't expect to be taken up on this so strongly! I hate to
disappoint you, but I doubt I can back this up very much.
>compare:
>mu'tlhegh *mu' tlhegh
>'Iwghargh *'Iw ghargh
These are both arguable, depending on how broad you're going to be with
"possession" in N-N stuff. They're still both proper compounds, in which
the first element modifies the second (not the other way 'round or
something weirder). They're also both fossilized expressions, or at the
very least given ones. It's one thing to talk about how "'Iw ghargh" would
differ from "'Iwghargh" (tho they sound kind of similar to me); it's
another to try to *predict* what the difference between "porgh bom" and
"porghbom" would be.
>If you have some evidence I didn't consider, which suggests they're
>qualitatively the same, I'd like to see it. You rarely make statements like
>this without having something in mind to back it up. ;)
Yow; I didn't think I was being that forceful (I just said I "tend to
view..." geez...) :). It may be that I take my N-N constructions even more
broadly than most (maybe more broadly than I should), and manage to accept
"word-string" and "bloodworm" and "transporter-room" as not very different
from "string of words" and "worm of blood" and "room of the transport
beam".
~mark