tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Aug 16 12:20:41 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: tlhIngan Hol lujatlhbogh puq'e'




>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.

qatlho'.  DaH jIyajmo' jIQochbe'.

>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

--Holtej 'utlh
Stardate 2624.84


_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com



Back to archive top level