{-moH} and two things instead of three
Lets remember an example which was written sometime ago in another thread.. Ha'DIbaHvaD mo' wI'elmoH we cause the animal to enter the cage Here, we have three things: an animal, a cage, and us. What would happen though, if we had only two things ? "the vulcans, caused the federation to accept them (the "them" referring to themselves, the vulcans)". Here we have only two things: the federation and the vulcans. So how would we say that ? Instinctively, I would write: {yuQjIjDI'vI'vaD vulqanganpu' lajmoH vulqanganpu'} But, my problem is, that the {vulqanganpu'} which precedes and follows the {lajmoH} is the same, i.e. it refers to the same people. As I understand it, the "they-them" zero-prefix, is to be used only when the "they" is other than the "them". So, at the above example, we can't say {vulqanganpu' lajmoH vulqanganpu'}. So, should we say instead the following ? {yuQjIjDI'vI'vaD laj'eghmoH vulqanganpu'} But this approach perhaps produces the meaning "the vulcans caused themselves to accept themselves, for the federation". Can someone, who knows what's going on here, shed some light on this ? ~ nI'ghma
On 3/21/2018 9:40 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
What would happen though, if we had only two things ? "the vulcans, caused the federation to accept them (the "them" referring to themselves, the vulcans)". Here we have only two things: the federation and the vulcans.
So how would we say that ? Instinctively, I would write:
{yuQjIjDI'vI'vaD vulqanganpu' lajmoH vulqanganpu'}
But, my problem is, that the {vulqanganpu'} which precedes and follows the {lajmoH} is the same, i.e. it refers to the same people.
As I understand it, the "they-them" zero-prefix, is to be used only when the "they" is other than the "them".
Your understanding is flawed. When an entity is both the doer of an action and the done upon, you use one of the reflexive suffixes to indicate this, and the entity is the subject. *jIqIp'egh jIH*/I hit myself. /When an entity is both the causer and the one caused to do the action, you use one of the reflexive suffixes. *mabom'eghmoH maH*/We cause each other to sing. /But in your example you have the same entity as the causer and the done upon, which is not one of the times you use a reflexive suffix. So your instincts are correct. If you don't like having the same entity on both sides of a single verb, do something like this: *vulqanganpu' laj yuQjIjDIvI' 'e' qaSmoH vulqanganpu'.* Or go with a syntactic noun: *vulqanganpu'mo' vulqanganpu' laj yuQjIjDIvI'.* -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
Just a detail in SuStel's message:
*mabom'eghmoH maH** We cause each other to sing.*
"We cause ourselves to sing.", otherwise it would be *mabomchuqmoH maH*. - André 2018-03-21 14:57 GMT+01:00 SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name>:
On 3/21/2018 9:40 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
What would happen though, if we had only two things ? "the vulcans, caused the federation to accept them (the "them" referring to themselves, the vulcans)". Here we have only two things: the federation and the vulcans.
So how would we say that ? Instinctively, I would write:
{yuQjIjDI'vI'vaD vulqanganpu' lajmoH vulqanganpu'}
But, my problem is, that the {vulqanganpu'} which precedes and follows the {lajmoH} is the same, i.e. it refers to the same people.
As I understand it, the "they-them" zero-prefix, is to be used only when the "they" is other than the "them".
Your understanding is flawed. When an entity is both the doer of an action and the done upon, you use one of the reflexive suffixes to indicate this, and the entity is the subject. *jIqIp'egh jIH** I hit myself. *When an entity is both the causer and the one caused to do the action, you use one of the reflexive suffixes. *mabom'eghmoH maH** We cause each other to sing. *But in your example you have the same entity as the causer and the done upon, which is not one of the times you use a reflexive suffix. So your instincts are correct.
If you don't like having the same entity on both sides of a single verb, do something like this: *vulqanganpu' laj yuQjIjDIvI' 'e' qaSmoH vulqanganpu'.* Or go with a syntactic noun: *vulqanganpu'mo' vulqanganpu' laj yuQjIjDIvI'.*
-- SuStelhttp://trimboli.name
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On 3/21/2018 10:12 AM, André Müller wrote:
Just a detail in SuStel's message:
*mabom'eghmoH maH*/We cause each other to sing./
"We cause ourselves to sing.", otherwise it would be *mabomchuqmoH maH*.
Yeah, I changed example sentences halfway through composing, and didn't catch every needed change. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
SuStel:
mabom'eghmoH maH We cause each other to
sing.
Did you mean to write {mabomchuqmoH maH} ? I understand the {mabom'eghmoH maH} as "we caused ourselves to sing". SuStel:
But in your example you have the same entity
as the causer and the done upon, which is not
one of the times you use a reflexive suffix. So
your instincts are correct.
So, this means that if we have a transitive verb on which we place the {-moH}, then: a. this verb can't have the causer as subject and the done upon as object b. we can't use the {-'egh}/{-chuq} on this verb in a sentence, such as the "the vulcans caused the federation to accept them" So, we can't express the intended meaning in the way {*yadda*vaD X *verb*moH X}, and we need to recast. Right ? ~ nI'ghma
On 3/21/2018 10:19 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
SuStel:
But in your example you have the same entity
as the causer and the done upon, which is not
one of the times you use a reflexive suffix. So
your instincts are correct.
So, this means that if we have a transitive verb on which we place the {-moH}, then:
a. this verb can't have the causer as subject and the done upon as object
b. we can't use the {-'egh}/{-chuq} on this verb in a sentence, such as the "the vulcans caused the federation to accept them"
So, we can't express the intended meaning in the way {*yadda*vaD X *verb*moH X}, and we need to recast.
Right ?
I wish you wouldn't try to put what I say into absolute formulas. I'm not declaring a rule; I'm analyzing what seems to happen in these sorts of sentences and drawing a conclusion. And it seems to me that the reflexive suffixes apply when a doer is also the done-to, and when a causer is also the made-to-do, and for no other combination. In {YvaD X VmoH X}, X is the causer and the done-to, which isn't one of those combinations that I think requires a reflexive suffix. It seems a correct construction. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
SuStel:
In {YvaD X VmoH X}, X is the causer and the
done-to, which isn't one of those combinations
that I think requires a reflexive suffix. It seems
a correct construction.
I think I understand your point, but there is something which still confuses me. How can we write {YvaD X VmoH X}, since there is no verb prefix to use, when both the subject and the object are the same person/persons ? In the verb prefix chart, when the subject and the object are the same person/persons, then we have a dash (-), which means that we can't write {YvaD X VmoH X}. So, if we needed to write a sentence as "the vulcans caused the federation to accept them", then we can't write it in the form {YvaD X VmoH X}, and we can't use {-'egh} or {-chuq}, so we need to recast. Would you agree with the above ? ~ nI'ghma
On 3/21/2018 1:29 PM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
SuStel:
In {YvaD X VmoH X}, X is the causer and the
done-to, which isn't one of those combinations
that I think requires a reflexive suffix. It seems
a correct construction.
I think I understand your point, but there is something which still confuses me.
How can we write {YvaD X VmoH X}, since there is no verb prefix to use, when both the subject and the object are the same person/persons ?
In the verb prefix chart, when the subject and the object are the same person/persons, then we have a dash (-), which means that we can't write {YvaD X VmoH X}.
So, if we needed to write a sentence as "the vulcans caused the federation to accept them", then we can't write it in the form {YvaD X VmoH X}, and we can't use {-'egh} or {-chuq}, so we need to recast.
Would you agree with the above ?
/The Vulcans/ is just a third-person noun. If {YvaD X PRE-VmoH X}, then PRE is the null prefix: X is either the singular third-person, in which case you've got singular, third-person subject and singular, third-person object (null prefix) or you've got plural, third-person subject and plural, third-person object (null prefix). You can't use this to say something like /I caused you to accept me/ because of the problem you're pointing out: /jIH/ can't be both subject and object (because there is no possible prefix for this combination, not even the null prefix). Which is how we get to recasting. If something is possible to say only in the third person, that's a good sign to me that it could do with a bit of work, even if it's otherwise legal. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
participants (3)
-
André Müller -
mayqel qunenoS -
SuStel