tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Nov 04 13:44:53 2009
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: Sentences as objects
- From: Terrence Donnelly <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: Sentences as objects
- Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 13:42:31 -0800 (PST)
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sbcglobal.net; s=s1024; t=1257370951; bh=Mdi6FSUr1NO/t7MHOWyCY6bEPEgzitDWcGeS24olP70=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=5xKEjfwq6lyEJwsONpelxmQW2s5csPLrMCHL3N9wY63apmc/kG/Mr5D5AXRXfkQ1MTyimFpCXUFmouZlCIhuLP2dz3kx6uVOLCec8+F6Pwnee24a9g3Z8OEETgOfDGEL2a3fEjE5ZddkX0pZhCpzNtg/ZHGExZEw8zV7/eIflBM=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=sbcglobal.net; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=wq0JCAuNz6YAmf5sB8kEpvSY+zOaKbmsiBEtWUzCEyd47iOyD4gSV7IIIUWQrz4ETboKqCIHjjZH3q2ecfIPk+u72GMz3RVFRfr1XrixbuCuD9OE/gNsQl34X8pQEmAuViliM6ldHF93zP2/ECHBPwJYT5bqQIvBDvtNP0hzYHo=;
- In-reply-to: <C305E6BD33E2654DAE1F8F403247B6A60113817CAFE8@EVS02.ad.uchicago.edu>
--- On Wed, 11/4/09, Steven Boozer <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> One can explain in writing or an email (as we are doing
> here!). E.g.:
>
If you are quoting reported speech, it doesn't really matter what the medium is, you are still "saying" it, even if you're using a computer.
ghomvaD SoQ vIjatlh, 'ej jagh jeylu'meH mIw vIQIj.
ghomvaD jIjatlh. jagh jeylu'. jIQIj.
jabbI'ID ghomvaD jabbI'ID vIghItlh, 'ej jagh jeylu'meH mIW vIQIj.
jabbI'ID ghomvaD jIghItlh. jagh jeylu'. jIQIj.
I don't really understand why MO decided that reported speech would not be an object and would not use {'e'}, but he did, so this is what I conclude from that.
And note that he says that the object of {QIj} is the "thing" explained, not the quotation of the speech act conveying the explanation. ?{jagh jeylu' ghomvaD 'e' vIQIj}.
-- ter'eS