[112038] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Topic
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Will Martin)
Mon Mar 4 12:56:45 2019
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
From: Will Martin <willmartin2@mac.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2019 12:56:39 -0500
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
In-Reply-To: <3F7DBC47-E0FF-4B0A-BDFB-42CE9371B8AE@dadap.net>
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
--===============7265922257744065667==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="Apple-Mail=_4384D633-5D6C-4758-96E4-21941DFA8492"
--Apple-Mail=_4384D633-5D6C-4758-96E4-21941DFA8492
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=utf-8
While it is true that Okrand said that putting {-Daq} on the direct =
object of certain verbs that take the location of things as their object =
is not grammatically wrong, there does seem to be more nuance involved =
than the confidence with which people habitually bring this up suggests =
is appropriate.
juH vIghoS. I go home. (I move along the =E2=80=9Chome=E2=80=9D path.)
juHDaq jIghoS. I am home, and I am going (somewhere). (I am in my home =
and I=E2=80=99m moving along an unnamed path. Maybe my home is a =
spaceship, or a water ship, or a railroad car, or an RV. In the examples =
Okrand gave, the locative represented the vehicle in which one traveled =
a path named after something other than the vehicle.)
juHDaq vIghoS. (Same meaning as {juH vIghoS}, and not grammatically =
incorrect, though there was a sense that this is typically less =
preferable to {juH vIghoS}. It sounded to me more like Okrand=E2=80=99s =
typical CYA effort to stop people from catching him make a mistake =
somewhere in canon.)
juHDaq ghoS HoD Qanqor. (Okay, so which does this mean? The prefix =
doesn=E2=80=99t make it clear. It could be either. You need context to =
disambiguate. I=E2=80=99ve heard from people how much they don=E2=80=99t =
mind ambiguity that I don=E2=80=99t need reminding again. Still, you =
have to confess this is messier. Language is messy sometimes. I get =
that. Meanwhile, that doesn=E2=80=99t make messiness any more noble or =
preferable.
Furthermore, I suggest that putting {-Daq} on the direct object of these =
special verbs probably is technically an error, but it=E2=80=99s such a =
common error that nobody counts it as an error anymore, very much like =
omitting the verb prefix {lu-} in the many canon examples that we have =
where it should have been there, but Okrand obviously forgot, especially =
the many examples of {tu=E2=80=99lu=E2=80=99} that technically should =
have been {lutu=E2=80=99lu=E2=80=99}.
I do get your point, that topicalization can also possibly occur on a =
noun that also functions as a subject or object, but my problem, which =
you don=E2=80=99t show great evidence of acknowledging, is that except =
for {-=E2=80=98e=E2=80=99} and the weird case of {-Daq}, in what could =
arguably be cases or marginal grammatical correctness, we don=E2=80=99t =
have examples of Type 5 suffixed nouns appearing in positions of subject =
or object. Even {-Daq} never appears on a subject in canon, and it never =
appears on the object in canon for any verbs EXCEPT for those special =
ones that assume location when the direct object doesn=E2=80=99t have =
{-Daq}.
Typically, the addition of Type 5 suffix on a noun DEFINES the noun=E2=80=99=
s grammatical function, and assigns its place in the word order of the =
clause in which it participates. This is the thing that is radically =
different about {-=E2=80=98e=E2=80=99}, and Okrand makes no effort to =
describe this in his grammatical description. Yes, he lathers it thickly =
among canon examples, but there is a place he should have explicitly =
explained {-=E2=80=98e=E2=80=99}=E2=80=99s unique rules of use among =
Type 5 suffixes, and he completely ignored that opportunity or =
responsibility. We=E2=80=99re just supposed to figure it out on our own =
from canon.
I suggest that there is nothing else in the language that gets more =
canon examples with more scant and inaccurate grammatical description =
than {-=E2=80=98e=E2=80=99}. He either made a mistake in the description =
or by omission providing an incomplete description, and he=E2=80=99s =
never made an effort to return to the topic (so to speak) to clarify =
exactly how {-=E2=80=98e=E2=80=99} is supposed to work.
charghwI=E2=80=99 vaghnerya=E2=80=99ngan
rInpa=E2=80=99 bomnIS be=E2=80=99=E2=80=99a=E2=80=99 pI=E2=80=99.
> On Mar 4, 2019, at 9:33 AM, Daniel Dadap <daniel@dadap.net> wrote:
>=20
>=20
>=20
>> On Mar 4, 2019, at 08:26, Daniel Dadap <daniel@dadap.net> wrote:
>>=20
>> I=E2=80=99m still in the process of learning the various nuances of =
the grammar, so I=E2=80=99m not familiar with this rule about nouns with =
syntactic marker suffixes needing to precede the object of a verb, and I =
couldn=E2=80=99t quickly find it. Could you point out where it=E2=80=99s =
given, please?
>=20
> Never mind, found it:
>=20
>> Any noun in the sentence indicating something other than subject or =
object comes first, before the object noun. Such nouns usually end in a =
Type 5 noun suffix (section 3.3.5).
>=20
> That doesn=E2=80=99t seem to preclude the object or the subject from =
being marked with a Type 5 noun suffix themselves. It=E2=80=99s just =
talking about nouns that aren=E2=80=99t already the subject or object.
>=20
> In fact, the examples about {-Daq} which show that {-Daq} can be used =
on the object of a verb that takes a locative object, and that this =
usage is redundant but not incorrect, give another example where a noun =
with an existing syntactic role (in this case an object) can take an =
NS5.
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
--Apple-Mail=_4384D633-5D6C-4758-96E4-21941DFA8492
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=utf-8
<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dutf-8"></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=3D""><div =
class=3D"">While it is true that Okrand said that putting {-Daq} on the =
direct object of certain verbs that take the location of things as their =
object is not grammatically wrong, there does seem to be more nuance =
involved than the confidence with which people habitually bring this up =
suggests is appropriate.</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div =
class=3D"">juH vIghoS. I go home. (I move along the =E2=80=9Chome=E2=80=9D=
path.)</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">juHDaq =
jIghoS. I am home, and I am going (somewhere). (I am in my home and =
I=E2=80=99m moving along an unnamed path. Maybe my home is a spaceship, =
or a water ship, or a railroad car, or an RV. In the examples Okrand =
gave, the locative represented the vehicle in which one traveled a path =
named after something other than the vehicle.)</div><div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">juHDaq vIghoS. (Same meaning as {juH =
vIghoS}, and not grammatically incorrect, though there was a sense that =
this is typically less preferable to {juH vIghoS}. It sounded to me more =
like Okrand=E2=80=99s typical CYA effort to stop people from catching =
him make a mistake somewhere in canon.)</div><div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">juHDaq ghoS HoD Qanqor. (Okay, so which =
does this mean? The prefix doesn=E2=80=99t make it clear. It could be =
either. You need context to disambiguate. I=E2=80=99ve heard from people =
how much they don=E2=80=99t mind ambiguity that I don=E2=80=99t need =
reminding again. Still, you have to confess this is messier. Language is =
messy sometimes. I get that. Meanwhile, that doesn=E2=80=99t make =
messiness any more noble or preferable.</div><div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">Furthermore, I suggest that putting =
{-Daq} on the direct object of these special verbs probably is =
technically an error, but it=E2=80=99s such a common error that nobody =
counts it as an error anymore, very much like omitting the verb prefix =
{lu-} in the many canon examples that we have where it should have been =
there, but Okrand obviously forgot, especially the many examples of =
{tu=E2=80=99lu=E2=80=99} that technically should have been =
{lutu=E2=80=99lu=E2=80=99}.</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div=
class=3D"">I do get your point, that topicalization can also possibly =
occur on a noun that also functions as a subject or object, but my =
problem, which you don=E2=80=99t show great evidence of acknowledging, =
is that except for {-=E2=80=98e=E2=80=99} and the weird case of {-Daq}, =
in what could arguably be cases or marginal grammatical correctness, we =
don=E2=80=99t have examples of Type 5 suffixed nouns appearing in =
positions of subject or object. Even {-Daq} never appears on a subject =
in canon, and it never appears on the object in canon for any verbs =
EXCEPT for those special ones that assume location when the direct =
object doesn=E2=80=99t have {-Daq}.</div><div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">Typically, the addition of Type 5 =
suffix on a noun DEFINES the noun=E2=80=99s grammatical function, and =
assigns its place in the word order of the clause in which it =
participates. This is the thing that is radically different about =
{-=E2=80=98e=E2=80=99}, and Okrand makes no effort to describe this in =
his grammatical description. Yes, he lathers it thickly among canon =
examples, but there is a place he should have explicitly explained =
{-=E2=80=98e=E2=80=99}=E2=80=99s unique rules of use among Type 5 =
suffixes, and he completely ignored that opportunity or responsibility. =
We=E2=80=99re just supposed to figure it out on our own from =
canon.</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">I =
suggest that there is nothing else in the language that gets more canon =
examples with more scant and inaccurate grammatical description than =
{-=E2=80=98e=E2=80=99}. He either made a mistake in the description or =
by omission providing an incomplete description, and he=E2=80=99s never =
made an effort to return to the topic (so to speak) to clarify exactly =
how {-=E2=80=98e=E2=80=99} is supposed to work.</div><br class=3D""><div =
class=3D"">
<div dir=3D"auto" style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: =
space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=3D""><div =
style=3D"caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: =
Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: =
normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; =
text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; =
word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: =
none;">charghwI=E2=80=99 vaghnerya=E2=80=99ngan<br class=3D""><br =
class=3D"">rInpa=E2=80=99 bomnIS be=E2=80=99=E2=80=99a=E2=80=99 =
pI=E2=80=99.</div><div style=3D"caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, =
0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; =
font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; =
text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: =
normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; =
text-decoration: none;" class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"></div><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
<div><br class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D""><div =
class=3D"">On Mar 4, 2019, at 9:33 AM, Daniel Dadap <<a =
href=3D"mailto:daniel@dadap.net" class=3D"">daniel@dadap.net</a>> =
wrote:</div><br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=3D""><div =
class=3D""><br class=3D""><br class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" =
class=3D"">On Mar 4, 2019, at 08:26, Daniel Dadap <<a =
href=3D"mailto:daniel@dadap.net" class=3D"">daniel@dadap.net</a>> =
wrote:<br class=3D""><br class=3D"">I=E2=80=99m still in the process of =
learning the various nuances of the grammar, so I=E2=80=99m not familiar =
with this rule about nouns with syntactic marker suffixes needing to =
precede the object of a verb, and I couldn=E2=80=99t quickly find it. =
Could you point out where it=E2=80=99s given, please?<br =
class=3D""></blockquote><br class=3D"">Never mind, found it:<br =
class=3D""><br class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D"">Any noun =
in the sentence indicating something other than subject or object comes =
first, before the object noun. Such nouns usually end in a Type 5 noun =
suffix (section 3.3.5).<br class=3D""></blockquote><br class=3D"">That =
doesn=E2=80=99t seem to preclude the object or the subject from being =
marked with a Type 5 noun suffix themselves. It=E2=80=99s just talking =
about nouns that aren=E2=80=99t already the subject or object.<br =
class=3D""><br class=3D"">In fact, the examples about {-Daq} which show =
that {-Daq} can be used on the object of a verb that takes a locative =
object, and that this usage is redundant but not incorrect, give another =
example where a noun with an existing syntactic role (in this case an =
object) can take an NS5.<br =
class=3D"">_______________________________________________<br =
class=3D"">tlhIngan-Hol mailing list<br class=3D""><a =
href=3D"mailto:tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org" =
class=3D"">tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org</a><br =
class=3D"">http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org<br =
class=3D""></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=3D""></body></html>=
--Apple-Mail=_4384D633-5D6C-4758-96E4-21941DFA8492--
--===============7265922257744065667==
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
--===============7265922257744065667==--
