Re: Q's abuot trigger again

Carsten wrote:

<<OK, I think that is answered. It doesn't have to be marked. But I still
don't understand why you mark "to write" as an instrument. Actually, you
write with a pen, you don't "pen" with a "write", don't you? Or is it just
because something must be marked as instrument here? Or is it due to the
intransitive-only verbs?>>

No, no, no.   "To write" isn't marked as the instrument of the sentence.
What happens is that "to write" is marked with an instrument marker (and you'd
assume that it'd be the same instrument marker that a noun is marked with), but
it's definitely and without a doubt a verb.   So, what you do is you see what
marker is on the verb, and then you know whatever the trigger is has that
function.   So, to clarify:

pen-TRIG. write-INST I-AGT. essay-PAT.

Might translate roughly to something like...

A pen "write with" I an essay.

Or, maybe...

I essay-write-with a pen.

If it helps, the affix "trigger" has no meaning.   It needs to be assigned a
meaning.   The reason you have the trigger marker is to indicate what's being
emphasized.   What the trigger means in the sentence is gleaned from the affix
on the verb.   So the affix on the verb isn't interacting with the verb at
all.   It's not saying something like, "I with writing an essay a pen".   It's
like "I with-write a pen via an essay", or something like that.   Rather than
trying to pick out the meaning of the noun with a trigger by itself, or the
verb with its affix by itself, you should try to glean the meaning of the noun
marked with the trigger *with* the verb marked with the affix.   Those four
items together will get you the focused action of the sentence.   Everything else
acts kind of like an adjunct, I'm guessing: You can take it or leave it.

By the way, this discussion of triggers is really helping me understand them
better.   Thanks to all!   I'm making my new pictograph language a trigger
language.   :)   It's double the fun: Triggers *and* pictographs!

-David