tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Dec 06 13:10:42 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KBLC: <ghor>
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KBLC: <ghor>
- Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 16:07:55 -0500 ()
- Priority: NORMAL
On Fri, 6 Dec 1996 10:10:05 -0800 Andrew 'Ska' Netherton
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > What does the sentence {ghor taj} mean? Does it mean that the knife causes
> > something to be made into pieces, or does it mean that the knife itself
> > becomes several pieces?
>
> Notwithstanding what Okrand says in TKD, can't we tell just by the
> placement of <taj> as the subject and not the object? Were the knife to
> make itself break, wouldn't it become <taj ghor 'oH>?
The problem with that is that the definition is ambiguous, yet
Okrand has provided us with an example of it being used only
transitively in canon. We know it can definitely be used
transitively. We do not know that it can be used intransitively.
> BTW, what *would* <ghor taj> mean? I'm still not 100% sure.
The knife breaks (things). The knife breaks it. The knife breaks
them. If you want "The knife breaks," in the sense that someone
was using it and the blade snapped, I'd use:
taj ghorlu'.
We KNOW that works. It follows the use of the verb as Okrand has
provided it.
> _________________________________________
> / _ \ \ ** Andrew Netherton **
> \__)| "VENI, VIDI VINNIE" \ __ University of Waterloo
> \ I came, I saw my cousin. |(_ \ Ontario, Canada
> \_____________________________________\___/ (519) 885-2717
>
charghwI'