[YG Conlang Archives] > [ceqli group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [ceqli] Re: definite & indefinite articles



on 1/31/04 2:33 PM, HandyDad at lsulky@hidden.email wrote:

> --SNIP--
> 
>>> I was wondering what the exact meaning of
>>> "to" was: does it just refer to something previously mentioned,
> or does it
>>> have some of the other meanings of the English "the", like "the
> only one" or
>>> "a generic instance of"?
> --SNIP--
> 
> The one usage of 'the' that really stands out to me as quite
> different from others is when it's used as a class marker
> (terminology?):
> 
> 'The lion is a mighty beast.'
> 
> Do we mean the lion we were talking about, or the only lion at our
> local zoo, which we all know about -- which would both require 'the' -
> - or all lions in general? I think using 'the' with this meaning is
> logically shaky. If I wanted to express the third alternative to a
> non-native-English speaker, I would probably express it as 'Lions are
> mighty beasts.' 

Yes. We need a t-word for 'The typical'.  Maybe 'ta' if we haven't assigned
it yet. 
> 
> --SNIP--
> 
>>> -Let's meet at the entrance.
>>> -Where is the bathroom?
>> 
>> This seems kind of catch-all.  Don't most of these sort of
> mean 'the one we
>> all know about, logically, without its necessarily being mentioned
> before'?
> 
> I agree, but these last two are a touch idiomatic: 'Let's meet at the
> entrance that we assume exists and is unique'; 'Where is the bathroom
> that I assume exists but is not necessarily unique?'. We probably
> wouldn't say 'Let's meet at an entrance' (unless we were just
> starting to think about where to meet, expecting to firm up our plans
> shortly), but we might well say 'Where is a bathroom?'.
> 
Sure.  And probably Ceqli can work the same way.

>>> 
>>> TD. the one identified by/as (the modifier of the noun)
>>> -the man who answered (as opposed to the one who ignored his
> phone)
>> 
>> This usage does seem different, somehow.  Question is, would 'to'
> suffice
>> for these, without ambiguity.
>> 
>> To jino hu pa fanbol.  To pa fanbol se jino.  as opposed to
>> Te jino hu pa fanbol.
> 
>> As in English, there's a difference between 'the man who answered'
> and 'a
>> man who answered'
>> 
> I think "to" works okay here, as a shortcut way of expressing 'A man
> answered and the man said....' It's a specific designation, just one
> that's kind of built-in to the phrase.
> 
Good.
-- 

Rex F. May (Baloo) 
Daily cartoon at: 
http://www.cnsnews.com/cartoon/baloo.asp
Buy my book at: 
http://www.kiva.net/~jonabook/book-GesundheitDummy.htm