CHAT hundi (was: Some more Madzhi grammar)
|From:||Raymond Brown <ray.brown@...>|
|Date:||Wednesday, March 20, 2002, 18:05|
At 5:47 pm -0500 18/3/02, John Cowan wrote:
>Raymond Brown scripsit:
>> Presumably, in fact, just like the Esperanto 'hundi'.
>I am no Esperantist, but I seem to remember that "hundi" means to
>merely behave like a dog, rather than to be a dog.
Oh - you may be right. I'm sort of remembering from my Auxlang days. I
know the Esperants vehemently (How else?) maintained that all the
'grammatical affixes' can be affixed to all stems. There was discussion
about 'hundi' with, of course, anti-Esperantists maintaining (with equal
vehemence) that such a form was nonsense & showed how 'flawed' E-o was.
I'm not sure all the Esperantists did agree exactly what 'hundi' meant; but
certainly they weren't going elaborate on any disagreement in that forum.
I thought the consensus among the Esperantists was "to be a dog", but I
might well have been mistaken.
A mind which thinks at its own expense
will always interfere with language.
[J.G. Hamann 1760]