[tlhIngan Hol] Rendered fat

[SuStel]

On 2/18/2017 8:37 AM, David Holt wrote:
>
> ghItlh SapIr:
>
> I suspect that part of the problem is that, for native speakers of
>
> English and most other European languages, the most natural place for the
> subject is before the verb. Thus, when we see *Soj vutlu'*, our
> instincts tell us that *Soj* is the subject, rather than an object in a
> sentence that doens't have an overt subject.
>
> I can't speak for others who have asked this question, but placement 
> of the object had nothing to do with my question.  I based my question 
> solely from the perspective that the pronominal prefixes which 
> normally indicate first- or second-person subject are used with 
> {-lu'}.  My hope was that following that model, we could also allow 
> {-wI'} to see the assumed object as the subject.  There is a form of 
> "promotion" of object to subject, though admittedly incomplete, 
> especially since the explicit object placement does not change.  I 
> admit that I couldn't recall the results of previous discussions and 
> so threw it in as an additional possability to be discussed for my 
> purposes.  I was not proposing it as my best suggestion and knew there 
> was a good chance others would shoot it down.  I accept their objections.

The exact sentence TKD uses to explain the indefinite subject prefixes 
is this: "Those prefixes which normally indicate first- or second-person 
subject and third-person singular object (*vI-, Da-, wI-, bo-*) are used 
to indicate first- or second-person object." TKD is telling us that the 
object of a verb with *-lu'* remains an object with *-lu'* there. The 
prefixes are being reassigned; they no longer have their old roles when 
*-lu'* is used. There is no promotion of object to subject.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20170218/37e4c563/attachment.htm>