On Tue, Oct 05, 2004 at 06:15:07PM -0700, Elliott Lash wrote:
> the word "have" is a difficult one in most Silinestic
> Languages.

As is the case in EbisÚdian, which uses a circumlocution to express
the concept.

> Nindic has over the years developed a word that's
> close enough to "have", in the sense of possess. But
> this took a long time.

Wow. That's an awesome trek down etymology lane. :-) Now you made me
wish EbisÚdian was more conducive to historical development.

But that aside, EbisÚdian simply uses the juxtaposition of cases to
express possession: a conveyant noun juxtaposed with a receptive noun
means the former _belongs_ to the latter, or the latter _has_ the
former. E.g.,

	jwl3'r     ebu'.
	house(cvy) I(rcp)
	Lit. "The house is to me"
	Xlat: "The house is mine" or "I have a house".

This construction is heavily loaded with idiomatic usage, one example
being when both nouns refer to people. E.g.:

	jwb3'          ropii'z3du.
	she(intim,cvy) that-man(rcp)
	Lit: "She is to that man."

Depending on context, this may mean any of the following things:
1) She has a romantic relationship with that man (common colloquilism)
2) She reports to that man (e.g. an employee to a manager)
3) She belongs to that man's party (e.g. "she follows that man's
   party, not our leader")
4) She is assigned to that man (e.g. that man is responsible for
   taking care of her by assignment)
5) She is going to take care of matters related to or with that man
   (e.g., as an answer to the question "where did she go?" or "why did
   she go there?")

There are many more possible interpretations. Which one is the correct
one depends entirely on context. E.g., if given as an answer to the
question "how is she related to that man?", interpretation (1) would
be understood. If given as a warning to a follower of some group,
interpretation (3) might be understood. If given by an overseer
during, say, a community event, interpretation (4) might be
understood. And so forth.

> hope you liked,
>  elliott

Yep I loved it. It actually got me to think in EbisÚdian again after a
long break. :-)


It only takes one twig to burn down a forest.