[86786] in tlhIngan-Hol
RE: Sentences as objects
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Terrence Donnelly)
Wed Nov 4 16:45:24 2009
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 13:42:31 -0800 (PST)
From: Terrence Donnelly <terrence.donnelly@sbcglobal.net>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
In-Reply-To: <C305E6BD33E2654DAE1F8F403247B6A60113817CAFE8@EVS02.ad.uchicago.edu>
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
--- On Wed, 11/4/09, Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu> wrote:
>
> One can explain in writing or an email (as we are doing
> here!). E.g.:
>
If you are quoting reported speech, it doesn't really matter what the medium is, you are still "saying" it, even if you're using a computer.
ghomvaD SoQ vIjatlh, 'ej jagh jeylu'meH mIw vIQIj.
ghomvaD jIjatlh. jagh jeylu'. jIQIj.
jabbI'ID ghomvaD jabbI'ID vIghItlh, 'ej jagh jeylu'meH mIW vIQIj.
jabbI'ID ghomvaD jIghItlh. jagh jeylu'. jIQIj.
I don't really understand why MO decided that reported speech would not be an object and would not use {'e'}, but he did, so this is what I conclude from that.
And note that he says that the object of {QIj} is the "thing" explained, not the quotation of the speech act conveying the explanation. ?{jagh jeylu' ghomvaD 'e' vIQIj}.
-- ter'eS
