[YG Conlang Archives] > [ceqli group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
I'm trying to pin down just what the transitive-intransitive thing really means, and what it implies for how ceqli should work. It seems that there are words like `kom' that are intrinsically transitive. "Go kom" ? We hear this as transitive, whether it has an indicated object or not. Other such words are "ku," "bua", "xau," "pomo," ? all of these have an implied object. The converse forms, "bekom," "beku," etc. are likewise transitive, as an actor is implied. They can be reflexive, of course ? to xlaq pa kom zel. to stoliarjino pa ganezu ku zel. Then those that are intrinsically intransitive ? dorm, pron. None of these seem to have any problems, but: Then we have verbs that are, in English, capable of being both. Cook, burn, etc. In ceqli, I think maybe such verbs should be intransitive in the base form. to karn tunu. The meat cooks. go tunufa to karn. I cook the meat. But what do you think? Am I being anglocentric here? If "tunu" remains transitive, then we'd have: go tunu to karn. to tunu bekarn. And maybe that's better. Because when something cooks, or burns, something is almost always acting on it. kyu parizo gi bebern? I think I've talked myself into the latter, unless you see something I've missed. And, while I'm at it, I think we can allow some ceqli verbs to be transitive in a Mandarinesque way: go dorm cuaq. I sleep bed. = I sleep in a bed. go ja parizo. I go Paris. go stu cer. I sit chair. But to say: This car seats six. I think we need ci tomo studon xei. All that aside, my next project is to get back to work on the glossary. Anybody who has any good ideas for vocabulary, bring it up here. .