tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Dec 09 09:00:40 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: jaH



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

>Date: Sun, 8 Dec 1996 12:11:47 -0800
>From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
>
>ja'pu' SuStel:
>>>Actually, this is just one of those uncertain verbs.  "Orbit" does mean
>>>"go in
>>>a circle around," so it could be {yuQ vIbav}.  However, English can use it
>>>intransitively, too, as in "I've been orbiting for nine hours."  Now all you
>>>have to do is say *where* this takes place.  {yuQDaq jIbav} would work in
>>>this
>>>case.
>
>ja' ~mark:
>>Nah, that';s not different than "Sop" which can be used in "I've been
>>eating for hours."  Just an ellipsized object.
>
>I think there *is* a difference.  One definition is "move around a center
>of attraction" -- the intransitive definition.  Another is "move around
>(a center of attraction)" -- the transitive one.  If the concept of the
>center of attraction is included in the definition, it should not be used
>as the verb's direct object.  If there were a verb {Soj} "eat food", it
>could not be used transitively in the same way as {Sop} "eat".  We still
>don't have any real evidence of whether {bav} *can* have an object.

Huh??

"Sop" means "eat (something)" when used transitively, and "eat something"
when used intransitively, by your notation.  Okrand says so.  It's just
using the transitive verb with an ellipsized object.  There IS some food
implied in "maSop", we just aren't being particular about it; it's suff in
general or it's not important to the sentence..  So too, with "bav".  There
IS always a center of attraction involved, the question is whether or not
we're bothering to say it.  I don't see how these are different.

>There's another transitive meaning of "orbit", by the way -- "put into an
>orbit" -- but I think that would be a less productive interpretation.

I don't think I've ever heard "NASA orbitted a sattelite this morning",
have you?

~mark

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface

iQB1AwUBMqxFssppGeTJXWZ9AQErtwL/f7WQT01EyLt8n74XdHglpBEjeq20FBvC
4HCry517IllrDc0OGo2HF3uikisirhd/ue4d5Zk2xGGuS4Emw/6Dbwaf1WglDtFo
kWtGnHk7Jn+0FRROBJR27hRrugb06rfi
=oPIF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Back to archive top level