On Monday, June 16, 2003, at 03:43  PM, Tim May wrote:

> Dirk Elzinga wrote at 2003-06-16 12:39:28 (-0600)
>> On Monday, June 16, 2003, at 12:00  PM, Tim May wrote:
> [...]
>>> What's the point of reference of these directionals?
>> The point of reference is contextually determined in the discourse.
>> Typically it will be the speaker, so that _taka-si_ will refer to
>> motion towards the speaker and _taka-hu_ will refer to motion away
>> from the speaker. However, in narratives this will change since the
>> narrator isn't always involved in the events being described. Right
>> now I have the impression that it isn't really much different than
>> English. For example, how do you know when to use 'come' and 'go'
>> when telling a story? I assume the same mechanisms will govern the
>> choice of directionals in Miapimoquitch. It's a question that I
>> haven't thought a lot about yet, but I knew that I didn't want a
>> system with absolute directionals (i.e., orienting events or
>> entities along compass points exclusively).
> Ah, very good.  It's my impression, though, that the contextual
> meaning of such terms varies quite a lot cross-linguistically, so
> there probably are some differences from English, even if the general
> scheme is similar.

Right. However, the differences will only become apparent when larger
chunks of discourse become available (i.e., I write them). Until then,
the specifics will have to remain undecided.

> See e.g. the section headed "Deixis and the verbs 'to go' and 'to
> come'" on this page here,
> which talks about the differences in use between English, Spanish and
> Nahuatl (you have to scroll down)u.  It's not a terribly good source,
> but I had it bookmarked.

Yes; this is the kind of thing I need to work out.

Dirk Elzinga
[log in to unmask]

"I believe that phonology is superior to music. It is more variable and
its pecuniary possibilities are far greater." - Erik Satie