kepeken e: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
m (Fix italics.) |
|||
| Line 87: | Line 87: | ||
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 mi lon e ma]."</ref> In the first, ''lon'' is a content word meaning "real, existing," and so the sentence means "I make the earth exist." The second sentence has ''lon'' as a preposition introducing ''ma'', so the sentence means, "I am in place." The presence of the particle [[e]] serves to distinguish them. |
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 mi lon e ma]."</ref> In the first, ''lon'' is a content word meaning "real, existing," and so the sentence means "I make the earth exist." The second sentence has ''lon'' as a preposition introducing ''ma'', so the sentence means, "I am in place." The presence of the particle [[e]] serves to distinguish them. |
||
Unfortunately, the particle [[e]] cannot |
Unfortunately, the particle [[e]] cannot always be used to disambiguate, and in some cases multiple intepretations are possible. A classic example, coined on 2002-05-28 by [[Nikita Ayzikovsy]] on the [[toki pona forums]] will suffice: |
||
<blockquote> |
<blockquote> |
||
| Line 96: | Line 96: | ||
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 possibilities, both glosses above are equally plausible interpretations. The difference between them is usually described by saying that ''tawa'' is acting as a preposition in the former interpretation, and as a content word in the latter. |
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 possibilities, both glosses above are equally plausible interpretations. The difference between them is usually described by saying that ''tawa'' is acting as a preposition in the former interpretation, and as a content word in the latter. |
||
== Conclusion == |
== Conclusion == |
||