tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Nov 05 17:10:50 2005
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: chenmoH/mojmoH (was Re: Klingon WOTD: cho' (verb))
- From: "QeS la'" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: chenmoH/mojmoH (was Re: Klingon WOTD: cho' (verb))
- Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 11:10:35 +1000
- Bcc:
ghItlhpu' lay'tel SIvten, ja':
>In English "become" is not transitive,
"I become king", "he became my manager". Looks transitive to me.
>although it is copular. What is the difference between "come into
>existence" and
>"begin to be"? They seem virtually the same to me.
Not just "begin to be", but "begin to be X" or "to change into X"
(transitive). I wouldn't accept {jImoj} as "I become, I come into existence"
(which is what I get from the intransitive sense of the English verb
"become" - you just can't say *"He came into existence my manager").
Again, I think there may be confusion between "be" (intransitive, = "to
exist") and "be" (transitive/copular). Copulas (copulæ? copuli?) indicate
equivalence, and as such require two things to link.
QeS la'
taghwI' pabpo' / Beginners' Grammarian
not nItoj Hemey ngo' juppu' ngo' je
(Old roads and old friends will never deceive you)
- Ubykh Hol vIttlhegh
_________________________________________________________________
Search the Web for cheap flights
http://search.ninemsn.com.au/results.aspx?rf=1&q=cheap+flights&FORM=HM