RE: Purpose Clauses (was Re: "conjunction"?)

["DloraH" <DloraH@kli.org>]

> >   ghojmeH taj
> >
> > The lack of prefix is clear.  "Knife for the purpose of learning."  I
> > see it as stronger than an indefinite subject -- it's *no* subject.
> 
> Is this in the KGT?  I didn't see it.  Also, (more importantly, IMHO), is 
> it used in a sentence?  /ghojmeH taj/ has the same problem as /pe'meH taj/ 
> if it's not used in a sentence; as a fragment, I don't think we can infer 
> whether or not it would properly have a proper prefix when used in a full 
> contextual sentence (ie. we have no evidence its proper use wouldn't be 
> something like /DaghojmeH taj Dalo'nIS/)

But since we are adults, the "you" in that sentence wouldn't be learning.  "You" is simply using a
knife that was designed for learning.  Anybody in general would use that knife for learning (at a
younger age).


> It looks to me like the anomalous example we have is actually the one  
> *with* a prefix on a noun-modifying {-meH}:
> 
>    qaSuchmeH 'eb

Here, the opportunity for visiting does apply to specific people (I/you).  It is not a generic
opportunity for just anybody to use.


DloraH