tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jan 25 21:37:05 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: charghwI's wish list (was Re: perpetual...)
>Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 19:59:27 -0800
>From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
>~mark writes:
>>...I was merely saying that that particular example (vIH) is one for
>>which we have the answer.
>We have *an* answer: {vIH} can be used intransitively. I can't tell
>from the example given whether it can be used transitively. "Can we
>use a verb with both transitive and intransitive meanings?" A simple
>"yes" or "no" from Okrand to answer this question would at least make
>the argument of transitivity meaningful; as it is, we don't even know
>if the question is important.
You are correct. It is my feeling that a language which distinguishes so
carefully between its transitive and intransitive meanings as to have a
-moH suffix, and words like vem/vemmoH, would not conflate transitive and
intransitive meanings. But you're right; we should hear from Okrand.
~mark