Some Scope Creep: Difference between revisions
m (Close parenthesis)) |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
* {{t|shoe kuq}} acts like an atomic verb, as in vanilla Toaq Delta, and so | * {{t|shoe kuq}} acts like an atomic verb, as in vanilla Toaq Delta, and so | ||
* {{t|shoe kuq jí súq sá}} means: {{t|∃x shoe kuq jí súq x}}. | * {{t|shoe kuq jí súq sá}} means: {{t|∃x shoe kuq jí súq x}}. | ||
** (In No Scope Creep, it means {{t|shoe jí ∃x kuq súq x}}. | ** (In No Scope Creep, it means {{t|shoe jí ∃x kuq súq x}}.) | ||
So serials remain their old-school scope behavior, where {{t|shoe kuq}} behaves the same as a would-be compound {{t|kuqshoe}}. | So serials remain their old-school scope behavior, where {{t|shoe kuq}} behaves the same as a would-be compound {{t|kuqshoe}}. | ||
Latest revision as of 19:21, 3 March 2025
Hoemaı's response to No Scope Creep was a suggestion to consider serial verbs separately from other cases. Some Scope Creep is a variant of that proposal which does exactly that:
- bu kuq jí sá means ¬(∃x kuq jí x), and
- ao kuq jí sá means AO(∃x kuq jí x), just like in No Scope Creep — but
- shoe kuq acts like an atomic verb, as in vanilla Toaq Delta, and so
- shoe kuq jí súq sá means: ∃x shoe kuq jí súq x.
- (In No Scope Creep, it means shoe jí ∃x kuq súq x.)
So serials remain their old-school scope behavior, where shoe kuq behaves the same as a would-be compound kuqshoe.
(But then how do we explain "why" shoe does not scope over its complement (kuq … súq sá)? Laqme thinks maybe we really should just treat serials like shoe kuq as syntactically the same sort of thing as atomic verbs, and model serialization using type-shifting instead of movement. See Weird VPs.)