Re: THEORY: Cross-Referencing Terms of Sub-Ordinate Clauses

Sorry, a (minor? major?) correction.

--- In conlang@yahoogroups.com, Tom Chappell <tomhchappell@Y...>
wrote:
> [snip]
> The "Goclenian" sentence
> [N2-subj V1 N1-obj SC2[N3-subj V2 N2-obj SC3[N4-subj V3 N3-obj SC4
[N5-subj V4 N4-obj SC5[N5-subj V5 N1-obj]]]]]
> is equivalent to the "Goclenian" sentence
> [N2-subj V1 N1-obj SC2[N3-subj Mark4-V2 SC3[N4-subj Mark4-V3 SC4[N5-
subj Mark4-V4 SC5[N5-subj Mark5-Mark6-V5]]]]]
> [snip]
This should have been:

The "Goclenian" sentence
[N2-subj V1 N1-obj SC2[N3-subj V2 N2-obj SC3[N4-subj V3 N3-obj SC4[N5-
subj V4 N4-obj SC5[N5-subj V5 N1-obj]]]]]
is equivalent to the "Goclenian" sentence
[N2-subj V1 N1-obj SC2[N3-subj Mark4-V2 SC3[N4-subj Mark4-V3 SC4[N5-
subj Mark4-V4 SC5[Mark5-Mark6-V5]]]]]

The difference is that in the sentence with the markers, the Mark6 on
V5 means the N5-subj need not be explicit -- in fact ought to be
implicit.

I don't know how many of you would have cared.

(Lord help me if somebody asks for a natural-language example!  I'm
trying to work "the house that Jack built" into this format, but it's
tough to do in my head.)

-----

Tom H.C. in MI