[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
And Rosta scripsit:
> CLL explicitly states that {coi xirma}, {doi xirma} are ambiguous
> between {coi/doi la xirma} and {coi/doi le xirma}.
Where do you see this? 6.11 seems to me to say that doi xirma means
doi le xirma only.
> There is a further wrinkle, though, which is that I take
> {doi/coi le xirma} to mean "I hereby address/greet a certain
> horse".
Not necessarily: "le" is +specific +/-definite, but you are reading
it as +specific -definite, which is too, er, specific. The +specific
+definite reading of "doi (le) xirma" is quite apt: "O thing I have in mind,
more-or-less aptly described as a horse!" If you believe you are what I have
in mind, you should listen even if you are not, objectively speaking,
a horse. Being named Horse is neither here nor there.
--
John Cowan <jcowan@hidden.email>
http://www.ccil.org/~cowan http://www.reutershealth.com
Unified Gaelic in Cyrillic script!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Celticonlang