tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Mar 12 08:47:05 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: -moH Curiousity {was Re: deep structures}
- From: Marc Ruehlaender <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: -moH Curiousity {was Re: deep structures}
- Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 10:46:49 CST
- In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 11 Mar 1999 17:00:30 -0800
jIja':
> > 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"...
>
mujang pagh, ja':
> 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>.
>
in general, I don't mind ambiguity. in fact I recently wrote something
about not excluding the possibility of a <Noun>-vaD in front of a <Verb>-moH
being either beneficiary of the root verb or beneficiary of the causation.
I'm not so sure on what to think about it now, though...
however, I AM concerned about the ambiguity in {DuHoHmoH}. Will I be made
to kill, or will I be killed? I'd probably have to kill the messenger and
prepare myself for a nasty feud...
this kind of ambiguity essentially renders these expressions useless for
communication, which is, I believe, one of charghwI's concerns, too.
You HAVE to be more explicit, in order to be understood.
well... on nth thought... maybe not... I guess context CAN disambiguate
even here... it's just all so confusing!
(I will try to go back to finishing the story I'm working on,
just hope I won't need any bad -moH constructions...)
Marc Ruehlaender
aka HomDoq
[email protected]