[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
And Rosta scripsit:
> As you know, if I am guided by meaning rather than usage then
> "le stedu be mi", "each of (a) certain head(s) of mine", also
> implies you have more than one head, else why the need for universal
> quantification, and why the need for specificity -- that is, why
> the need to invoke a particular le'i stedu be mi, when you are
> in fact talking about the membership of lo'i stedu be mi?
I think that the trouble here is not with "le stedu" but with "be mi",
which is malglico. "Er setzte die H�nde in die Taschen ein"
is the normal way to say "He put his hands in his pockets" in German;
whose pockets would he put his hands in, after all (or vice versa).
I believe I warn about this overspecification of possession (or any
restriction, really) somewhere in CLL. In context, "le stedu cu se cortu"
should be plenty for "My head hurts".
> 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.
I have no trouble with "ti" pointing to a *text*, but making it point to
the referent of the text is more shaky. "ti" is supposed to be tied to
physical pointing: "ti du'u le xanto cu barda" seems very dodgy to me.
--
John Cowan jcowan@hidden.email http://www.reutershealth.com
"Not to know The Smiths is not to know K.X.U." --K.X.U.