<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/4/2017 6:40 PM, ghunchu'wI' 'utlh
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CC98D014-7D4A-4F4C-A775-1B2BD60DF590@alcaco.net">
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">
<pre wrap="">On Oct 4, 2017, at 3:32 PM, SuStel <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:sustel@trimboli.name" moz-do-not-send="true"><sustel@trimboli.name></a> wrote:
If you have three Men and a Baby, and you say Man One and Man Two changed the Baby, there is a very strong implication that Man Three did not change the Baby.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">It doesn't imply to me that Man Three <b class="moz-txt-star"><span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span>never<span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span></b> changes the baby, just that he didn't do it in the event being discussed.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>It works exactly the same if you talk about predilections instead
of a single event.</p>
<p>Three Men live with a Baby. When the Baby needs changing, Man One
and Man Two change it. The strong implication is that Man Three
doesn't change the Baby when the Baby needs changing.<br>
</p>
<p>Could there be an exceptional case where one day Man Three
changes the Baby? Sure. Do you know of any instance whatsoever in
which Man Three has changed or would change the Baby? No, not at
all. The fact that I didn't say Man Three doesn't change the Baby
doesn't suddenly mean that he has changed the Baby or even would
change the Baby.<br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CC98D014-7D4A-4F4C-A775-1B2BD60DF590@alcaco.net">
<pre wrap="">Okrand's explanation was focusing on how to interpret a prefix that doesn't match the possible objects for a verb, and addressed "similar" situations where it doesn't match the stated object. I believe that the mismatch need not be limited to person, but can include number.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>You believe this without example or explanation from Okrand, and
with a strong implication against it.</p>
<p>Look, the warning in TKD that when it says "always" or "never"
you mustn't take that too literally applies to this as well. Could
there be exceptions to what he said? Yes. Does that very message
imply any exceptions? No. If Okrand wants to declare that the
prefix trick works when the prefix's number doesn't match the
direct object's number, he can do that. He might even do it if Qov
or Lieven report this argument to him and show him the line in <i>Discovery</i><i>
</i>we're talking about; he could back-fit the error into good
grammar.</p>
<p>But nothing like that is even hinted at in his explanation.<br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</body>
</html>