Re: tlhIngan Hol lujatlhbogh puq'e'

["David Trimboli" <SuStel@hotmail.com>]

From: "d'Armond Speers" <speersdl@msn.com>
> 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