tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jan 04 15:09:29 2010
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: qoSwIj
- From: "Mark J. Reed" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: qoSwIj
- Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 18:08:12 -0500
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=iMWRJRKeKFdnUVIeElFyuZuDXOBFLlZjn4P9cHNPuHc=; b=hopUdaRs+Sj/XuLt+S/fb2WMBQV6d6bKv+/LN18hSeEn1B0RkePJXZIxbwJcdphaPl k4Qtt3Pl+9aD4bz+Iur0yMwDXe4WMAyVU6CcHOliCe5B5dyCA9KyhQWH+4G0v2uCs319 FJDUydCICPJJkuZ9GqVXNm97ZK1RuFQjUuMks=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=ZFtveOaiSEtxvLEn25UOownznPy1vJf1n6mOgxAxQNNDOGu0Mo25SuYQT4xfXHor/6 Q5WVVZn2yXFF10YC3CV8y31owfHXOcz0laHgSWYteKzI48hIWqg1QABdCgRell7Wb69P ux7afJ0I99gxKi0HEgYylRxdIIV0nRw78wFx4=
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <C305E6BD33E2654DAE1F8F403247B6A60113A1A565F0@EVS02.ad.uchicago.edu> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 5:45 PM, David Trimboli <[email protected]> wrote:
> I suspect Thorwald meant to emphasize the "today," as you guess above,
> but then you'd have to put {-'e'} on two different verbs in the
> sentence, and that'd be weird. We don't know if that kind of thing is
> allowed.
Two different nouns, you mean. :)
Agreed, it seems odd to have two topics. Does the -'e' in copula
sentences have any emphatic force left? If so, just making the noun
you want to emphasize the topic would seem to work here. But it could
be that the -'e' is pure syntax at this point, in which case I'm not
sure how one would go about adding emphasis.
Tangentially related question: is the -'e' required to be on the
second noun in a copula, or can it be on the first?
-marqoS