[YG Conlang Archives] > [engelang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
I think this proposal is better than any earlier proposals. One thing I need to ponder more is plnaki "A uses I" => plnabeki "A does something to E using I" I feel it would be better plnabi "A uses I" => plnabike "A uses I on E" It doesn't matter much for that one predicate, but I'm thinking of parallelisms with: VkV >> VbVkV liquid X soaks Y >> A makes liq X soak Y stuff X fills Y >> A makes stuff fill X sharp thing X cuts Y >> A makes sharp thing X cut Y rough thing X abrades Y >> A makes rough thing X abrade Y stuff X covers Y >> A makes X cover Y light X shines on Y >> A makes light X shine on Y *** For each polyadic stem bcd-, the lexical entry for bcd- will specify the role of the explicit argument in bcdV. For each triadic stem bcd-, bcdVkV would always mean that the Agent is omitted (right)? But bcdVbV would be potentially ambiguous: which of the two nonagent arguments does the second V stand for? This too could be specified in the lexical entry for bcd-. However, if an extra C could be spared for this purpose -- -x- ([G]), say -- then bcdVbV vs bcdVxV vs bcdVkV would allow any of the three args to be implicit without ambiguity. --And.