Re: Marking and Imperatives

>Matt Pearson (Madth Bfiysn):
>> >> In Tokana, I frequently leave off the first person subject with verbs of
>> >> thinking and saying:  When a sentence expresses a point of view, and
>> >> it's not made explicit whose point of view it is, it's assumed to be
>> >> the speaker's point of view:  For example, "I think that John has left"
>> >> would be rendered "Opa nelhukanne Tsion", literally "Think that-he-has-
>> >> left John".
>> >
>> >How do you do "It is thought (by people in general) that"?
>>
>> Same way.  Nobody every accused Tokana of being precise and
>> unambiguous!  :-)
>>
>> One way to mark the distinction would be through the use of
>> evidential particles:  There are several particles, one of which
>> means "this sentence is the speaker's personal opinion", and
>> another one which means "this sentence represents hearsay".
>
>Why bother with "think" at all? Why not just use the evidential
>particles?
Because other people can think things besides the speaker and the
general public.  How else could I say "Bill thinks that John has left"?

Besides, there's a subtle difference in meaning between using
and evidential and using a verb like "think" (I think):  In "I think
that John has left", the focus of the sentence is on what I
believe; whereas in "John EVID has left", the focus is on John
leaving, with the additional information being conveyed that
John's leaving is not a certainty but something I surmise.

Matt.