|From:||Jim Henry <jacklongshadow@...>|
|Date:||Friday, April 15, 2005, 17:21|
<salut_vous_autre@...> li toki e ni:
>any verbal root can have 4 uses (but the 4 may not all exist):
>Alone it will be an impersonnal verb, when it agrees with the arguments it's
>a descriptive/stative verb, when it has the marker "de" and agrees with an
>argument it's an active verb, and when it has the prefix "ai-" it's a noun.
>Also, I derived the verbs "die" and "kill" from the same root, "die" being
>the stative and "kill" the active
>But when I had to say what'd be the name related to that root, I realise it
>would mean both "death" and "murder"
Or "dying" and "killing".
Could you apply the nominalizer prefix to a verb that already has the "de" marker?
I don't know what your actual root is, so
ai-[death] = death, dying
ai-de-[death] = killing (not necessarily "murder", as other posters have pointed out).
Alternatively, you might have a noun phrase for killing - something like
(not necessarily in that order)
>(Out Topic question: why are there some much way to die
>and so less to born and live?)
Hm... maybe some cultures would want distinct words for
"be born naturally", "be born by C-section", "be born as one's
mother is dying", "be born at home", "be born in a hospital"...
maybe all derived from underlying verb forms meaning "give birth
[under such-and-such conditions]".
-- Jim Henry