[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Sat, 14 Dec 2002, Jordan DeLong wrote: > On Sat, Dec 14, 2002 at 06:17:36PM -0500, Invent Yourself wrote: > > On Sat, 14 Dec 2002, And Rosta wrote: > > > > > > (Any usage which does is incorrect, and should probably be using > > > > > > ti/ta/tu). The difference between da and ko'a is the same as between le > > > > > > and lo > > > > > > > > > > See chapter 7;3 to see why ti is unusable > > > > > > > > I don't see what you're complaining about... > > > > > > Without checking the book, I am guessing that the objection to your > > > use of ti is based on mabla anti-malglico tradition -- in this > > > instance, the notion that ti with a textual referent is insufficiently > > > deictic. > > > > Book says explicitly that ti is only used for finger pointables; I need > > something abstract. > > Not sure what you mean by "something abstract". But it's usable > for anything which has distance from the speaker (conceptually). > The book goes out of its way to say that you don't need to be > face-to-face for this to work. All the "finger pointing" stuff is > just a metaphor. "...they cannot refer to things that cannot be pointed at." -- jipno se kerlo re mei re mei degji kakne