Re: Chinese adpositions (was: Re: inalienable possession)

Douglas Koller wrote:
> Sure it *translates* into English as "for", but the price you pay for
> saying that it *means* "for" or that it's a preposition is that instead
> of SVOVO, you have: S(prep. phrase)VO (prep. and post. [actually
> circum.] phrases go before the verb...weeeeell except they sometimes go
> after, here, here, here, and here).
But aren't some of those "verbs" *only* used as adpositions?  I suppose
that at times it is rather iffy as to whether a word is adpositional or
nominal/verbal.

--
"It has occured to me more than once that holy boredom is good and
sufficient reason for the invention of free will." - "Lord Leto II"
(Dune Chronicles, by Frank Herbert)
http://members.tripod.com/~Nik_Taylor/X-Files/
ICQ #: 18656696
AOL screen-name: NikTailor