tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Nov 17 09:56:40 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: plans
- From: Marc Ruehlaender <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: plans
- Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 11:56:33 CST
SuStel, I think I need to point out that my arguments apply ONLY
to the phrase "I/We do not know that <blah>", where <blah> is a
statement (not, e.g., a name :)
if the subject is not 1st person - no problem
if the main sentence is not negated - no problem
if the verb is not "know" - completely different "problem"
if the conjunction is not "that" - no problem
> > - if you didn't know earlier, but know now, you can say
> > {yuch Soppu'(be') puq 'e' vISovbe'} to indicate you didn't know or
> > {yuch Soppu'(be') puq DaH 'e' vISov} to indicate you know now
>
> When you see an aspect suffix on the first sentence of a Sentence As Object,
> remember that there's funny grammar that may be at play. TKD states that eve
> n
> if the aspect's sense applies to the second sentence's verb, it will be put o
> n
> the first one. In fact, any aspect suffix in a Sentence As Object tends to
> affect the entire construction, not just one of the verbs.
>
the {-pu'} can be left out without changing my reasoning
> Suppose {yuch Soppu' puq} is false. Then I certainly can't know that {yuch
> Soppu' puq}, can I?
>
no, but there are two distinct possibilities:
o you know that {yuch Sop(pu')be' puq}
o you don't know which of the two is true
just out of curiosity: does
"I don't know that the child didn't eat the chocolate."
also mean
"I don't know whether the child ate the chocolate."
?
(it just occurred to me that maybe the difference is in the scope
of the "not" in the main clause; am I right that you think of it
as negating "I know that the child ate the chocolate."? It looks
like I see it as negating only "know", if that makes sense to you...)
> Also consider the following, posted by Marc Okrand. Note especially his
> translation of the sentence with {SIv}.
>
as English does it one way and German an other, I'd rather wait for
canon with {... 'e' vISovbe'} before I use it; I don't think you can
infer anything from how {SIv} - or any other verb - behaves for
determining the behaviour of {Sov} (or, at least, you can infer only
little)
HomDoq