tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Mar 11 16:42:44 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: -moH Curiousity {was Re: deep structures}
- From: "Andeen, Eric" <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: -moH Curiousity {was Re: deep structures}
- Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 17:45:39 -0700
jatlh HomDoq:
>> A noun with /-vaD/ and
>>
>> 1. Any verb without /-moH/: the noun is the regular beneficiary/indirect
>> object (in your words, "beneficiary of the root verb").
>>
>> 2. An intransitive verb with /-moH/: the noun is still the regular
>> indirect object.
>>
>> 3. A transitive verb with /-moH/: the noun is the "beneficiary of the
>> causation", or the object which is compelled by the subject to perform
>> the verb.
> all right. jIyajchu'.
>> For 2. and 3., the prefix trick can be used to replace /jIHvaD/ or
>> /SoHvaD/. This doesn't change them into direct objects; they are
>> still the beneficiaries. This is just a short-hand way to refer to
>> them.
> here I disagree to the extent that you cannot use the prefix trick
> if there is no explicitly stated Direct Object.
I'm not so sure about that. If I'm looking at a book someone is holding with
my hand out, I would probably not say <paq HInob>; I would just say <HInob>.
> otherwise {muHoHmoH} would again be ambiguous, as it could mean
> both "She makes (someone) kill me" or, as a shortcut for
> {jIHvaD HoHmoH}, "She makes me kill"...
Natural languages have ambiguity - this is not Lojban. If you're terribly
worried about the ambiguity, just be more explicit. If Maltz is the other
person involved, just use <jIHvaD matlh HoHmoH> or <matlhvaD jIH muHoHmoH>.
pagh
Beginners' Grammarian