tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Nov 10 13:16:27 2006
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: transitivity
- From: Terrence Donnelly <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: transitivity
- Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 13:16:05 -0800 (PST)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=sbcglobal.net; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=xmo4T1ot+73SCW2XMDR+mwEgGHTqrWTAwJB0UC/gJwkznkhx2chbVctBIQAk16k7VYT9CllqIbGU1KNCzTenB6ZPgkajhp+o6XJVdv015JfJqcR0tuSxGMw4N+WR/1C1iWbWdnKusBW28sInF8T049ujIYazg9g+j+zHtrS4K4w= ;
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
--- Steven Boozer <[email protected]> wrote:
> Voragh wrote:
> > > jIghung je
> > > I am also hungry. PK
> > >
> > > {je} applies to the verb: hungry in addition to
> thirsty
> > >
> > > jI'oj je
> > > I am also thirsty. PK
> > >
> > > {je} applies to the verb: thirsty in addition
> to hungry
>
> DloraH:
> >I take the joke as <je> applying to the subject.
> "I am hungry/thirsty
> >also, in addition to you." He was replying to the
> prisoner saying he
> >was hungry/thirsty.
>
> So you see no difference between {jIghung je} "I'm
> also thirsty, I'm
> thirsty too" (which are ambiguous in English) and
> {jIghung jIH je} "I, too,
> am thirsty" other than the emphasized pronoun?
>
>
I agree with DloraH, and think that you are right
about the emphasis of the above. In the joke, how
could the first {je} possibly apply to the second
verb,
unless someone is claiming that the guard can see into
the future.
-- ter'eS