Discoursing on Discourse (an imperative mood is to be passivised)

Q:   facebook (January 10, 11)

Please somebody help me what is the passive of: “Shame on you!” can it be “Let shame be on you!”

We have many controversies here in Nepal regarding grammar…..like teachers use question tags in proverbs and axioms but i feel it is to be used only to confirm statements and thoughts. like: Barking dogs seldom bite, do they? but i write “isn’t it?”

by: Jaya Narayan Bhusal

 

A:   The rule of thumb is that an action in passive voice requires the transitivity (of verb) for thematic participants unless the axiom from which the mood arrives is in a pseudo form or on the underlying inherent base structure that is confirmed with its thematic participants—hence the subject receive the action (e.g. ‘be ashamed’ (but the subject is in ellipsis, or the subject is as a proximate disjoint person in pragmatics)).

On to the next comment, the example is closely related to the aphorisms that can interestingly be tagged in conversational maxims, like any other forms to which their semantic derivations are regarded as the analogues of their surface syntactic axioms.

Why do you think that they shouldn’t be tagged?  The only problem that I can think of is the imperatives, like–

‘Go for swimming,…would you?’
(perhaps a little bit awk, while there are two parts)

‘You will go for swimming today, wouldn’t you?’
(which is alright to me.)

–Nevill Fernando

Linguistic morphology: agglutination versus polysynthesis

Q:   facebook (August 31, 10)

I’ve got a very important question concerning linguistic morphology. What is a clear-cut definition for polysynthesis? The isolating, synthetic, and agglutinative types of morphology are very obvious to me but I’ve been pondering how to define polysynthetic morphology and what its function is in polysynthetic languages. Could you also give me examples of languages that use polysynthesis? I’ve heard that some languages can be both agglutinative and polysynthetic but what is the difference between agglutination and polysynthesis in plain English? All the definitions that I’ve read in linguistic papers are a little on the technical side. Polysynthesis just seems so abstract. 

 

A:   Here is a little chat on that– http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Maunus&diff=next&oldid=401727007#On_the_polysynthesis_of_Otomi

  

Adjunct, temporal adverb, adverbial

 Q:   facebook (December 04, 10)

I’ve a question that I hope someone would help me with. In the following sentence should we use [ left ] or [ had left ] and why ?

** After I had gone home, I realized that I ……….. my wallet at the supermarket.
And also if we use WHEN in a sentence like this one where it’s followed by three actions, which one should be present perfect and which should be past simple ?

 

A:   In the grammar of English, however, the time is conceptualized as being located on a time axis. And a fixed point on the time axis is the speech time of interaction between a speaker and a hearer when an event occurs in posterior or in anterior to it. Then the event frame locates the event by comparing the position of the frame with respect to the tense locus. The two most important considerations in tense systems are the selection of the tense locus and the nature of the relationship between the tense locus and the event frame. So what we have here is a preterite and present reading. And as English does not have the form for an anterior to a past event, other than the pluperfect (a perfective form), it is the alternative (though the actual reading is ambiguously non-pefective). So it is fine that the temporal adverb be a past reading (‘after i went home’)= “After i went home, i realized that i had left my wallet.”  –Nevill Fernando (Dec 04, 10)

Tools ‹ — WordPress

Tools ‹ — WordPress.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.