User:Laqme/Object-incorporating particle: Difference between revisions

m
(Created page with "Toaq could have an '''object-incorporating particle''' like Lojban's <code>be</code>. Let's call it «{{t|do}}» (in neutral tone). The idea is that {{t|vẻrb do óbject}} is a new intransitive verb that has the object slot filled. So, {{t|fıeq do lúa}} means "___ invents the story." {{Example|Pủ fỉeq do lúa jí da.|I invented-the-story.}} From another perspective, {{t|do}} just makes an object-incorporating verb out of the preceding verb: {{t|pỏga do}}...")
 
Line 13: Line 13:


== Opacity ==
== Opacity ==
Current object-incorporating verbs are said to be "opaque": quantifications like {{t|po tu poq}} are restricted to the small "{{t|po}} + object clause", rather than the encompassing clause.
Current object-incorporating verbs are said to be "opaque": quantifications like {{t|po tu poq}} are restricted to a ficticious small "{{t|po}} + object clause", rather than the encompassing clause.


Another way to think about this is that the quantifications don't leave the ''definition'' of the new verb.
Another way to think about this is that the {{t|tu}} doesn't leave the ''definition'' of the new verb.


Thus {{t|po tu pỏq}} always means "[∀P: poq(P)] ___ is P's", or in English: "___ is everyone's".
Thus {{t|po tu pỏq}} always means "[∀P: poq(P)] ___ is P's", or in English: "___ is everyone's".
Line 23: Line 23:
I'm not sure if {{t|hao do}} should be "opaque" in the same way, but I think it makes sense. Consequences include:
I'm not sure if {{t|hao do}} should be "opaque" in the same way, but I think it makes sense. Consequences include:


# {{t|Fíeq do sıa lua}} means "the one who invents no stories" rather than "no story's inventor".
# {{t|Fíeq do sıa lua}} means "the one who invents no stories" rather than "no story's inventor". This is definitely more intuitive to me.
# {{t|Lỉaı gão do tu rua sa apı}} means something different from the old {{t|Lỉaı gào tu rua sa apı}}. This might be fine? Not sure which is more intuitive. Either is still achievable with prenex.
# {{t|Lỉaı gão do tu rua sa apı}} means something different from the old {{t|Lỉaı gào tu rua sa apı}}. This might be fine? Not sure which is more intuitive. Either is still achievable with prenex.