On Thu, 2017-07-06 at 11:57 -0400, SuStel wrote:
On 7/6/2017 11:46 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
If instead of {SoHtaHbe'chugh} we wrote {SoHbe'taHchugh}, and if instead of {vIta'pu'be'} we wrote {vIta'be'pu'}..
1. Would you accept these choices as equally correct ? 2. Meaning-wise, would you find that they are any different ?
I would accept them as grammatically valid but not necessarily identical in meaning.
The example with *ta'* is easier, because it's an actual verb. *vIta'pu'be':* I didn't *ta'pu'. vIta'be'pu':* I did *ta'be'*. The former describes a thing I might have done and says it didn't happen; the latter describes a thing I DID do, which is the not-doing of something. The distinction is subtle, and in most cases it wouldn't make a difference which you used.
The one with *SoH* is messier because pronouns only act like verbs when they interact with other words, and because it seems like *-taH* may be required when the pronoun is combined with a locative, but that isn't clear... If someone were to choose the other form than I did, I wouldn't have a problem, and I wouldn't even be sure there is a significant difference.
Similar to the first example of 'not taking action' vs 'taking action to not do something', (putting aside that -taH might be required with locatives) I take [SoHtaHbe'] and [SoHbe'taH] as 'not being something' vs 'being not something'. Very subtle, probably no difference on the streets, but in a philosophy class, I would see a bit difference. - DloraH