tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Aug 16 11:16:27 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: tlhIngan Hol lujatlhbogh puq'e'
From: "d'Armond Speers" <[email protected]>
> I know this has been discussed ad nauseum, but I'm still confused about
> this. Can you provide an example of a locative noun as a subject? Unless
> you're thinking something like {Qom Dat} and are counting {Dat} as a
> locative.
>
> Or, you're just saying that the rules don't explicitly prohibit it, and
it's
> a logical possibility that one day we may see this, just like we
eventually
> saw locatives as the object of verbs of motion like {ghoS}. Not that
you're
> advocating its use with what we know today. Is that the point?
That is precisely the point. And analyzing nouns this way eliminates the
need for /-'e'/ and objects of verbs of motion to be exceptions. It's all
about what objects and subjects the verb normally uses. /-'e'/ is simply
more likely than any other Type 5 to appear as subject or object, because
its meaning is usually compatible with those. X-Daq is not likely to be the
subject for many verbs, because most verbs don't work with a locative
subject. (We don't know of any that do, but that doesn't prevent the
possibility.)
And whether or not such a thing actually exists, the interpretation is a
useful one to understand things like WHY verbs of motion can take locative
objects, and why /-'e'/ can appear as subject or object. It explains what
we DO see, while not forcing you to do something which we DON'T see.
SuStel
Stardate 2624.70