Re: Commentary: From Tokana to Denden
|From:||Boudewijn Rempt <bsarempt@...>|
|Date:||Thursday, November 18, 1999, 21:03|
On Thu, 18 Nov 1999, Matt Pearson wrote:
> I must not have provided nearly enough info, because you seem to have
> parsed these sentences incorrectly. The correct structure is:
Well, what made me go wrong was the bit in the notes:
So "itan maha olat" in the above poem can only mean "that which
one hears". It can't mean "that which hears things".
So I took that for the relative clause, and tried to connect the
dative 'suhoi' and 'sihe' and so on to the verb.
> [ itan maha olat suhoi ] uthma tsampatin
> [ that which (one) hears in-the-wind ] gives health
> [ itan maha olat sihe ] uthma pamihati
> [ that which (one) hears in-the-stream ] gives nourishment
> So SUHOI and SIHE are part of the relative clause.
> The ending -AT on OLAT indicates that this verb is part of an embedded
> clause (here, a relative clause headed by MAHA "what"). The ending -A on
> UTHMA, by contrast, indicates that this verb is in the main clause.
Well, I'd really like to see a thorough syntactic analysis of this
constructions - it's still not entirely clear to me.
> I guess Tokana is harder than I thought! :-)
Well, that's what I told you when I mailed you that I'd finished
Boudewijn Rempt | http://denden.conlang.org