[109803] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] qep'a' webpage
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (SuStel)
Thu Jul 6 11:57:54 2017
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
From: SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name>
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 11:57:20 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CAP7F2cLA2wG60TMoJBA1Sn20mpY3dFJO+c41rV90jGMuvo2jtA@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.
--===============1007138690519589677==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------4B8FD356CFA3140F0DC83D60"
Content-Language: en-US
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------4B8FD356CFA3140F0DC83D60
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On 7/6/2017 11:46 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
> If instead of {SoHtaHbe'chugh} we wrote {SoHbe'taHchugh}, and if
> instead of {vIta'pu'be'} we wrote {vIta'be'pu'}..
>
> 1. Would you accept these choices as equally correct ?
> 2. Meaning-wise, would you find that they are any different ?
I would accept them as grammatically valid but not necessarily identical
in meaning.
The example with *ta'* is easier, because it's an actual verb.
*vIta'pu'be':* I didn't *ta'pu'. vIta'be'pu':* I did *ta'be'*. The
former describes a thing I might have done and says it didn't happen;
the latter describes a thing I DID do, which is the not-doing of
something. The distinction is subtle, and in most cases it wouldn't make
a difference which you used.
The one with *SoH* is messier because pronouns only act like verbs when
they interact with other words, and because it seems like *-taH* may be
required when the pronoun is combined with a locative, but that isn't
clear... If someone were to choose the other form than I did, I wouldn't
have a problem, and I wouldn't even be sure there is a significant
difference.
--
SuStel
http://trimboli.name
--------------4B8FD356CFA3140F0DC83D60
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 7/6/2017 11:46 AM, mayqel qunenoS
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAP7F2cLA2wG60TMoJBA1Sn20mpY3dFJO+c41rV90jGMuvo2jtA@mail.gmail.com">If
instead of {SoHtaHbe'chugh} we wrote {SoHbe'taHchugh}, and if
instead of {vIta'pu'be'} we wrote {vIta'be'pu'}..
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">1. Would you accept these choices as equally
correct ?</div>
<div dir="auto">2. Meaning-wise, would you find that they are any
different ?</div>
</blockquote>
<p>I would accept them as grammatically valid but not necessarily
identical in meaning.</p>
<p>The example with <b>ta'</b> is easier, because it's an actual
verb. <b>vIta'pu'be':</b> I didn't <b>ta'pu'. vIta'be'pu':</b> I
did <b>ta'be'</b>. The former describes a thing I might have done
and says it didn't happen; the latter describes a thing I DID do,
which is the not-doing of something. The distinction is subtle,
and in most cases it wouldn't make a difference which you used.</p>
<p>The one with <b>SoH</b> is messier because pronouns only act
like verbs when they interact with other words, and because it
seems like <b>-taH</b> may be required when the pronoun is
combined with a locative, but that isn't clear... If someone were
to choose the other form than I did, I wouldn't have a problem,
and I wouldn't even be sure there is a significant difference.<br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</body>
</html>
--------------4B8FD356CFA3140F0DC83D60--
--===============1007138690519589677==
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
--===============1007138690519589677==--
