Re: "triggers et al" as I presently understand them

----- Original Message -----
From: Ray Brown <ray.brown@...>
To: <CONLANG@...>
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 8:55 AM
Subject: Re: "triggers et al" as I presently understand them


> On Thursday, November 18, 2004, at 08:45 , Rodlox wrote:
>
> >  it bounced since I was over my 5 limit...re-trying...
> >
> >
> >> okay, I'll be going in chronological order here...
> >>
> >> *TRIGGERS
> >> at first, I thought that the letter starting the sentance could modify
a
> >> =
> >> word to a vastly different meaning (leading to that sketchlang where =
> >> 'ukku meant see/fear/seek)...
>
> Oh. I clearly misunderstood your example.
 sorry.

> On Tuesday, November 16, 2004, at 10:38 , Rodlox wrote:
> [snip]
> >  also, I've become given to understand that a trigger doesn't simply
> > modify
> > a word (run/ran/running), but it changes the word's entire meaning.
> >
> >  'ukku = I, you
> >  a  'ukku  ayn = I see you
> >  o  'ukku  ayn = I fear you
> >  u  'ukku  ayn = I seek (pursue) you
>
> 'ikku = I, you.
>
> Now you say "where ='ukku meant see/fear/seek)...". So how are we to parse
> your sentences if the meaning of _'ukku_ changes from "I, you" on 16th
> November to "see/fear/seek" just two days later?
 parse thusly: me got bad memory.


> >> ..then I came to understand that it [the "trigger"] simply chooses =
> >> between the forms of something (rather like the Neteru of Ancient =
> >> Egypt)...ie, pen/write/language/script...etc.
>
> ?? Where did you understand this from?
 I think the example provided (no, don't remember which post) had writing,
pen, and other related items  under a single word, which could be specified
which one  by use of a (trigger(?)) word.


> >> *FRONTING
> >>  this was one that confused me for a while, since it said that...well,
=
> >> like in "Ted ran away to the far off tree", that _Ted_ modified =
> >> _ran_.....and that, to me, made no sense.
>
> It probably makes no sense to anyone else either.
>
> Who or what is "it" who allegedly said this?
  don't remember.


> >> I would have thought that the time-tense modified _ran_ (making it =
> >> something other than, for example, _runs_), or that _ran_ was modified
=
> >> by _away_ or the destination (somehow being affected by _the far off =
> >> tree_).
>
> Eh? What? _ran_ is the simple past tense (sometimes called the 'preterite'
> ) of the verb "to run".
 yes, but if a language were to have both "to run" and "past tense" next to
one another, one could say that the latter modifies the former, yes?

Reply