[tlhIngan Hol] Clarification on SIch

[Ed Bailey]

On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 9:52 AM De'vID <de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> There's more than one dialect of English. There's no requirement that
> they're consistent. Indeed, there's a famous story about a misunderstanding
> due to speakers of different dialects of English agreeing to "table" an
> item during a meeting.
>

Assuming it's the same story, I just happened to read about it last night
in Churchill's six volume history of WW2. British members of the Combined
Chiefs of Staff produced a proposal which they said they wished to table.
Their American counterparts wondered why then had bothered to write it.
Once the misunderstanding was resolved, both parties heartily endorsed the
proposal.

Back to *SIch*, it seems clear it differs from *paw* in that only a body
part or implement is used to arrive at its object. I think another
difference is what the progressive aspect means. Compare reaching for a
book and a train going to a city or a station. As soon as someone begins to
reach for a book, regardless of his ultimate success, I'd say he *SIchtaH*
or *SIchlI'*. But I would only say *pawtaH* of a train that is entering the
city or pulling into the station.

Here are two more things about SIch I'd like clarified.
Can it be used with the body part or implement as its object? *?chabHom bal
qoD ghopwIj vISIch* *I reach my hand into the cookie jar*.
Or can the body part or implement be the subject? *?chabHom bal qoD SIch
ghopwIj* *My hand reaches into the cookie jar.*

*~mIp'av*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190410/78ecb592/attachment.htm>