[tlhIngan Hol] Clarification on SIch

[De'vID]

On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 at 04:30, qurgh lungqIj <qurgh at wizage.net> wrote:

> {paq vISIch 'e' vInID} "I extended (my arm) to try to grasp the book", "I
>> tried to grasp the book (by extending my arm, etc.)" (i.e., "I reached for
>> the book")
>> {SIch 'e' nID} "He extends (his arm) to try to grasp something", "I tried
>> to grasp something (by extending his arm, etc.)" (i.e., "He reaches for the
>> book")
>> {paqvetlh DaSIchlaH'a'} "Are you able to extend yourself to touch that
>> book?" (i.e., "Can you reach that book?")
>>
>
> This helps clear things up. So, for you, "reach for" includes the concept
> of a failed attempt?
>

No, it's sort of the other way. "Reach" (usually) means a successful touch.
"Reaches for" could be successful or not.

Have you heard the expression "reach for the stars"? For you, would that
mean someone was actually touching them?


> For me "reach for" means a successful "reach and grasp/touch", while
> "reach" on it's own is just the extending part.
>

It may be dialectical, but it also depends on the preposition. "He reaches
*toward* me" would mean he extended his arm in my direction (whether or not
he touches me). "His hand reached my mine" means his hand actually touched
mine. "He reached for the box of tissues and took one" means he
successfully came into contact with the contents of the box and removed one
tissue.


> "Reach for those crisps and hand them to me, won't you dear" was the sort
> of thing I often hear in my childhood when someone wanted me to pick up
> something and give it to them. "I tried to reach for the book", "He tried
> to reach for the book", "Can you reach for the book?" is how they come out
> in my dialect, hence the confusion.
>

Those make sense to me. "Reach for" doesn't imply success.

These mean slightly different things to me:
"Can you reach the book?" - Is it in range if you extend your arm?
"Can you reach for the book?" - Would you extend your arm in the book's
direction?

In most contexts, the first (question) implies the second (request), but
not always.

-- 
De'vID
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190410/6378db5a/attachment.htm>