[98757] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Objects with -moH
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Brad Wilson)
Mon Jun 2 23:41:15 2014
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
In-Reply-To: <mailman.335.1401741907.18818.tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
From: Brad Wilson <bmacliam@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 23:41:02 -0400 (EDT)
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============4984189242206375593==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="--------MB_8D14CF4C643027C_21EC_11ED45_webmail-d244.sysops.aol.com"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
----------MB_8D14CF4C643027C_21EC_11ED45_webmail-d244.sysops.aol.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
My opinion on {meQ}. While canon may seem to contradict itself regarding {m=
eQ} and {meQmoH}, I see it differently.
Something can be on fire - perhaps it is made of combustible matter - this =
is clearly {meQ}
"Causing something to burn", ie. to enter a state of {meQ}, is clearly {meQ=
moH}, perhaps by soaking it with fuel prior to lighting it. Then it continu=
es to burn, whether the actor is still around or not. (It could be argued t=
hat {meQchoH} might apply here also.)
However, there is canon to support {meQ} as transitive without {-moH}. I do=
n't have a problem with this. If I am burning something which does not have=
the inherent property to burn on its own, I would use {meQ}. I need to con=
tinue my action in order for the object to continue to burn - if I stop, th=
en it stops burning.
Your thoughts?
gheyIl
=20
----------MB_8D14CF4C643027C_21EC_11ED45_webmail-d244.sysops.aol.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
<font color=3D'black' size=3D'2' face=3D'arial'>
<div style=3D"font-size: 10pt; color: black;">
<div id=3D"AOLMsgPart_0_64a93a6c-9ed3-48f9-949c-a295e73810e3" style=3D"marg=
in: 0px; font-size: 12px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 2=
55, 255);"><pre style=3D"font-size: 9pt;"><tt><font face=3D"Arial, Helvetic=
a, sans-serif">My opinion on {meQ}. While canon may seem to contradict itse=
lf regarding {meQ} and {meQmoH}, I see it differently.</font></tt></pre><pr=
e style=3D"font-size: 9pt;"><tt><font face=3D"Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"=
>Something can be on fire - perhaps it is made of combustible matter - this=
is clearly {meQ}</font></tt></pre><pre style=3D"font-size: 9pt;"><font fac=
e=3D"Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">"Causing something to burn", ie. to ente=
r a state of {meQ}, is clearly {meQmoH}, perhaps by soaking it with fuel pr=
ior to lighting it. Then it continues to burn, whether the actor is still a=
round or not. (It could be argued that {meQchoH} might apply here also.)</f=
ont></pre><pre style=3D"font-size: 9pt;"><font face=3D"Arial, Helvetica, sa=
ns-serif">However, there is canon to support {meQ} as transitive without {-=
moH}. I don't have a problem with this. If I am burning something which doe=
s not have the inherent property to burn on its own, I would use {meQ}. I n=
eed to continue my action in order for the object to continue to burn - if =
I stop, then it stops burning.</font></pre><pre style=3D"font-size: 9pt;"><=
font face=3D"Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Your thoughts?</font></pre><pre =
style=3D"font-size: 9pt;"><font face=3D"Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">gheyI=
l</font></pre>
</div>
<!-- end of AOLMsgPart_0_64a93a6c-9ed3-48f9-949c-a295e73810e3 -->
</div>
</font>
----------MB_8D14CF4C643027C_21EC_11ED45_webmail-d244.sysops.aol.com--
--===============4984189242206375593==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
--===============4984189242206375593==--
