kepeken e: Difference between revisions
mi pona e pakala
m (Clarify monsutatesu) |
(mi pona e pakala) |
||
Line 25:
Now, typically the /last/ case (that with a [[Glossary#modifier|modifier]] as the [[Glossary#head|head]] of a preposition) can be expanded thus:
:;mi pali e ni<nowiki>:</nowiki> moku li suwi.
::I bring this about: the food is sweet.
Line 34:
:;soweli li monsuta e mi la mi monsuta.
Unfortunately, the theoretical purity of this transformation breaks down in practice. In certain cases, it is not clear whether the The [[Glossary#ordinary values|ordinary values]] of toki pona words do not allow for this degree of freedom, so the meaning of the last sentence is completely ambiguous:
:;soweli li monsuta e mi la mi monsuta.
Line 42:
It is not clear whether this is tale of big bad wolf or of lycanthropy, since in the first case the word is interpreted as a modifier applied to the object, and the second as a noun into which the subject is transformed. This confusion is called the ''monsutatesu'', the "monsuta test", since it is most clear with the word ''monsuta''. However, ''monsuta'' is not the only word that behaves this way. Many prepositions are similarly ambiguous, particularly when used transitively.
== Lexemes ==
In the beginning,
As a reminder, a [[preposition]] can introduce an [[indirect object]] to the [[predicate]] of a [[sentence]]:
Line 58:
:;jan lili li tawa tomo sona.
::The
The word [[kepeken]], when at the head of a predicate, is variously treated as a [[transitive verb]] or as a [[preposition]]. In terms of [[surface features]], the particle [[e]] is used by some and omitted by others:
Line 71:
Now since a transitive predicate is interpreted as making the predicate apply to the direct object of the sentence, and a prepositional phrase can head a predicate, it is possible to transitively apply a prepositional phrase to a direct object, like so:
:;jan lanpan li poki e ona li tawa tomo telo e ona.<ref>[https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wGSEiI3XlJ32YKeFRmp6U-HMKW96Ac_4/view
::The pirate put them in a cage can brought them to the boat.
Line 78:
:jan lanpan li tawa tomo telo e ona la ona li tawa tomo telo,
which holds together. Now ordinarily "tawa tomo telo" is interpreted as a
Generally, though, prepositions can also act as content words. In the sentence
Line 85:
::I watched a movie.
It is practically impossible to interpret the last word of the sentence as a preposition, rather than a [[modifier]] of the word ''sitelen''. The phrase ''mi lon e ma'' has a completely distinct flavor from ''mi lon ma''.<ref>jan Kekan San, "[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GU9PEZ9TARs
Unfortunately, the particle [[e]] cannot appear in all contexts. A classic example, coined on
<blockquote>
;mi pana e tomo tawa sina.
:I give you a house. OR
:I brought your car.<ref>Nikita Ayzikovsky, [http://forums.tokipona.org/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=32#p68
</blockquote>
This sort of sentence is necessarily ambiguous. Since ''tawa'' could be either a modifier or a preposition, and no feature of the language enables the speaker to distinguish the
== Conclusion ==
Line 107:
:mi tawa e sina la sina tawa.
Seems to set a precedent for a prepositional interpretation, unless the latter is also interpreted as a transitive and
Unfortunately, there is no correct answer: the ambiguity in latent in toki pona itself. However, a few lines of flight appear. First: must we cling to the notion of "prepositions"? These words do generally act strangely, in that they can introduce sub-sections of a sentence; this seems to be a property restricted to the five "prepositions". On the other hand, it is not clear that this would change their meaning when made transitive: though the possibility of transitive prepositional ''phrases'' remains, the interpretation of the words ''alone'' as heads of a predicate is unclear. Perhaps in circumstances like these, the "prepositions" are all content words:
| |||