[Tlhingan-hol] Type 5 on first noun

[SuStel]

On 2/10/2016 11:41 AM, Brent Kesler wrote:

[snip derivation]

> If we recast the Type 5 rule as "A Type 5 suffix can only go on the
> second element of a noun phrase", and we can have multiple noun phrases
> embedded within a larger noun phrase, then phrases like {QamchIyDaq
> 'uQ'a'} fit the rule.

That makes the rule completely meaningless then. Why does it exist if 
you can simply redefine the first noun as a noun phrase that includes a 
syntactic suffix?

I think it's clear that when Okrand says "noun" in section 3.4 he means 
"noun or noun phrase." Whether N1 and N2 are nouns or noun phrases, N1 
can't have a type 5 suffix. {QamchIyDaq} is a noun AND a noun 
phrase—every noun is both a noun and a noun phrase—and it's being 
excluded from the rule. Being inflected for syntax doesn't make a noun 
any less a noun, but it DOES disqualify it from being "N1." The rule 
says that {QamchIyDaq 'uQ'a'} is illegal, period.

I'm rather amazed at the gymnastics everyone is going through to avoid 
admitting the phrase violates the rule. It might be an error or it might 
be an exception, but I still see no way it can legitimately be said to 
follow the rule.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name