Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

† † † Disambiguation of arg ument reference

From:David Peterson <digitalscream@...>
Date:Wednesday, October 9, 2002, 19:13
Fuscian wrote:

<<You can't say *"What are you putting on?"
because you're leaving out an entire argument - the object placed. It is
perfectly all right to say "What are you putting the book on?" The place
argument, being core, cannot be dropped, but it can be questioned, dangling
preposition and all, just like any other argument.>>

Yeah.   That was the point.   You can't leave the argument out, hence, it is
core.   If you can leave an argument out, then it's oblique.   Am I getting
these definitions wrong?

And, yes, "to go to" is different from "to go" in that example.   English is
fun that way.   A good example would be "I'm eating on the table".   "On the
table" is *definitely* oblique, since it doesn't change the idea of "eating"
at all.

<<If "to ___" with the verb "go" is
oblique, with what verb is it core?>>

Don't know what or why you mean here, but "talk", I guess: "I talk to him",
vs. *"I talk him".   But there, the verb is "to talk to", so the argument is
still "him", I guess, and the "to" part is just an obligatory part of the
verb.   Yeah, I don't know what you mean here.   And I thought that it was
core with "to go"...   Oh well.


"imDeziZejDekp2wilDez ZejDekkinel..."
"You can celebrate anything you want..."
               -John Lennon