[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[lojban-beginners] Re: ti, ta, tu for people?
Le mercredi, 19 fév 2003, à 20:35 Europe/Paris, Robert LeChevalier a
écrit :
At 12:44 PM 2/19/03 +0100, jexOm. wrote:
"3. Demonstrative pro-sumti: the ti-series
The following cmavo are discussed in this section:
ti KOhA ti-series this here, a nearby object
ta KOhA ti-series that there, a medium-distant object
tu KOhA ti-series that yonder, a far-distant object"
So, to me Philip's question is understandable, since a person is not
an "object".
The dichotomy between "person" and "object" is politics, not language.
I understand the point, I just wanted to show that Philip's question
was justified.
Try to say "what's that?" when designing a person, he/she won't be
happy...
So the discussion was worth having, and now we know the answer.
[BTW, linguistics _is_ politics.]
Here is the definition of object in Merriam-Webster:
Etymology: Middle English, from Medieval Latin objectum, from Latin,
neuter of objectus, past participle of obicere to throw in the way,
present, hinder, from ob- in the way + jacere to throw
[...]
There is no definition of "object" therein that excludes people.
True. You can take a person and throw _it_ away :-)
"Object" has several definitions. In some, it is in opposition with
subject. Treating a human being like an object is negative enough to
prove that in some cases (most of cases in common usage), it is
incorrect to use the term "object" to refer to human beings, even
animals or plants. Never played to guess a word chosen by somebody
else? The questions usually are:
- is it an object?
- no.
- is it a plant?
- no.
- is it an animal?
- no.
- is it a person?
- yes.
In English (in French, too), there are two different words: "something"
(quelque chose) and "somebody" (quelqu'un), like "what" (quoi) and
"who" (qui). Etc.
That's why in fact I had asked myself the same question as Philip.
And thank you for the answer! I'll take care of that when explaining
{titatu}.
Jérôme.