tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jan 30 08:42:31 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC Nature Phenomenon
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: KLBC Nature Phenomenon
- Date: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 07:45:39 EST
In a message dated 98-01-27 21:37:52 EST, you write:
<< ja' qe'San:
>Excuse me for jumping in at the deepend here but surely the 'subject'
>of - rain (v) - is the weather (or possibly the atmosphere/sky).
"Surely"? Hardly. I can think of three reasonable subjects and one rather
odd fourth possibility without trying hard at all. Until we get some sort
of "real" example of these words in use, it's all going to be conjecture.
> The
>'object' would then be the noun which is rained upon eg the house, the
>ground, the hill, the region and so on. Maybe even 'the
>event/celebration'.
If that were the case, the verb would probably have been stated as meaning
"rain on" instead of simply "rain". Based on the examples you give later,
I suspect you're just confusing a locative (a noun with the suffix {-Daq})
with an object, and you really don't consider the thing being rained on to
be the object. >>
-----peHruS continues-------
I have to take the conservative stance here. TKD does gloss SIS and peD only
as "rain" and "snow" (v), not "rain on" and "snow on". I have not considered
either word capable of taking a direct object. You all have noticed that I do
not even consider them taking a subject.
Unfortunately, if we start thinking that the usage is different from the
gloss, we can create a lot of confusion. What I really hope for is seeing
MO's sentences using these two and all other words he has created until we all
have the same understanding of the correct meanings and usages.
taHjaj wo' peHruS