[109041] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Rendered fat
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (SuStel)
Sun Feb 19 03:14:30 2017
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
From: SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name>
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2017 16:36:56 -0500
In-Reply-To: <CABSTb1eCYx8a9Q8Fd0h7znjOh2CaSDz3-HYNYuMxb_wDdsW45w@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============1072408653517737051==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------40254D87AEA416A7E7904CBA"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------40254D87AEA416A7E7904CBA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On 2/18/2017 2:23 PM, Ed Bailey wrote:
> jatlh SuStel:
>
> *-wI'* has the effect of nominalizing the verb into the subject of
> that verb. A *vutwI'* is the thing that performs *vut,* the subject of
> *vut.*
>
> If you were to say **vutlu'wI',* you'd be trying to nominalize the
> verb into a nonexistent subject. No one in particular performs
> *vutlu',* so it makes no sense to talk about the noun that performs
> *vutlu'.*
>
> As I said, I'd like to hear what MO has to say on the subject.
I'd like to hear what Okrand has to say on every subject we ever
question. That's not an argument against what I said.
> It's bound to be more nuanced, not to mention a lot less bombastic and
> opinionated.
Fuck you, asshole. Bombastic enough for you?
--
SuStel
http://trimboli.name
--------------40254D87AEA416A7E7904CBA
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2/18/2017 2:23 PM, Ed Bailey wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CABSTb1eCYx8a9Q8Fd0h7znjOh2CaSDz3-HYNYuMxb_wDdsW45w@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">jatlh SuStel:
<p style="margin-left:40px"><b>-wI'</b> has the effect of
nominalizing the verb into the subject of that verb. A <b>vutwI'</b>
is the thing that performs <b>vut,</b> the subject of <b>vut.</b></p>
<div style="margin-left:40px"> </div>
<p style="margin-left:40px">If you were to say <b>*vutlu'wI',</b>
you'd be trying to nominalize the verb into a nonexistent
subject. No one in particular performs <b>vutlu',</b> so it
makes no sense to talk about the noun that performs <b>vutlu'.</b></p>
As I said, I'd like to hear what MO has to say on the subject.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>I'd like to hear what Okrand has to say on every subject we ever
question. That's not an argument against what I said.<br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CABSTb1eCYx8a9Q8Fd0h7znjOh2CaSDz3-HYNYuMxb_wDdsW45w@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"> It's bound to be more nuanced, not to
mention a lot less bombastic and opinionated<span
class="m_973410155822178912gmail-">.</span></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Fuck you, asshole. Bombastic enough for you?<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</body>
</html>
--------------40254D87AEA416A7E7904CBA--
--===============1072408653517737051==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
--===============1072408653517737051==--
