Re: Syntactic Differentiation of Adverbial vs. Adjectival Adpositions

Logan Kearsley wrote:
> Consider the sentence "I ate the fruit on the table."
> In English, this is structurally ambiguous, because the prepositional
> phrase can apply to the verb or a noun- did I eat fruit which was on
> the table, or did I eat the fruit while I was on the table?
> I think someone mentioned a conlang that has a semantic distinction
> between adverbial and adjectival prepositions;
Quite likely, tho I can't think of one immediately. But Classical Latin
certainly makes a distinction. In CL prepositional phrases may be used
only adverbially.

Therefore _poma in mensa edi_ can mean only that I got onto the table
and ate the fruit* there (the fruit may have already been on the table
waiting for me to climb beside it and eat it, or I may have brought
along to eat there).

*I assume 'fruit' is being used as a mass noun in this English sentence,
therefore I've used the neuter plural _poma_.

If I want to say I eat the fruit which was already on the table waiting
for me, then I must say: _poma quae in mensa erant edi.

>  But what about using different syntax to
> distinguish the two cases? Say, prepositions as noun-modifiers, and
> postpositions as verb-modifiers (or vice-versa)?
>
> Then the case where the fruit was on the table before I ate it would
> be "I ate the fruit on the table", whereas the case where I ate the
> fruit while I was on the table would be "I ate the fruit the table on"
> / "I the table on ate the fruit".
I see; adpositional phrases use a preposition if they function
adverbially but a postposition if they function adjectivally.
Interesting idea - somehow I doubt that any natlang works like that -
but you newer know with ANADEW      ;)

--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
Frustra fit per plura quod potest
fieri per pauciora.
[William of Ockham]

Reply