tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jan 11 00:13:34 2006
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: transitivity
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: transitivity
- Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:13:12 EST
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 1/10/2006 9:19:19 PM Central Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:
> So, the answer to the question "Is {jISop} transitive
> or
> intransitive?" is "Both: {Sop} is always semantically
> bivalent/
> transitive; but {jISop} is grammatically
> univalent/intransitive."
>
Another way of saying this is that the second semantic argument of
grammatically univalent {jISop} is implied, unknown, or unimportant.
lay'tel SIvten