[tlhIngan Hol] -lI': intentional or not?

SuStel sustel at trimboli.name
Tue Feb 28 08:56:20 PST 2017

On 2/28/2017 11:45 AM, Lieven wrote:
> Am 28.02.2017 um 16:26 schrieb SuStel:
>> None of them are used to describe an agentless action, lending credence
>> to the argument that the dearth of agentless *-lI'* shows that it isn't
>> allowed.
> Could you rephrase that, so that a non-native english speaking 
> non-linguist can understand, please. 

One of the three arguments made to support the idea that *-lI'* can only 
be used when someone /intends/ the action to reach a goal is that of all 
the canonical examples of *-lI',* none involve an action someone did not 
choose a goal for. "If *-lI'* can be used for stopping points not 
intended by anybody," goes the argument, "why don't we see any examples 
of this in the canon?"

Voragh listed seven examples of *-lI'* from /paq'batlh,/ all of which 
are about actions in which someone intends a specific outcome.

With an even greater number of examples of *-lI'* that do not show that 
someone set up a goal intentionally, the "why haven't we seen any?" 
argument grows stronger.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20170228/cc4eed48/attachment-0002.htm>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list