Re: 'together vs. to gather'

Those glyphs are nice, but one needs some Talarian
culture to understand them at once, I think.

Yes, I think that there is a plural in them because
instinctively one feels to draw several arrows, and
not just one. You would never instinctively draw
several arrows for a concept like "to go", even if the
subject may of course be plural (I don't mean
representing a whole predicate, like  "Many people are
going". If you drive two arrows, you can get to some
concepts like "to separate" (from each other), "to
split", "to divorce" (or: to join, to meet, etc.)

Thinking about dust, I came to the conclusion that if
there is something like "dust gathering" without any
reference to plural (and it looks like it might), then
one had to draw an arrow which would be large at its
beginning and narrow at its end (in that case: not
several arrows). OK, sounds not bad.

I think there are other plural-verb concepts, even if
they are not grammatical verbs in English or others.
Like "to move together" (like a group), for ex.

--- Costentin Cornomorus <elemtilas@...> wrote:
> --- Philippe Caquant <herodote92@...>
> penned:
>
> > If you had to draw a symbol for "to gather" or
> > "to
> > disperse" (both intransitive), how would you do
> > ?
>
> The Talarian glyphs for tâhanam (pay) and capanam
> (receive) are at
>
<http://www.geocities.com/elemtilas/temp/pay_receive.jpg>.
> The doololly that looks like a P is the "object"
> determiner.
>
 That's way I think
> > that
> > those verbs contain a seme of "plural".
>
> ?? I'm still not understanding how any sense of
> number attaches to these actions. Is it because
> you've got more than one arrow?
>
> Padraic.
>
>
=====
Philippe Caquant

"Le langage est source de malentendus."
(Antoine de Saint-Exupery)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus

Replies