Biblical Hebrew Forum

[David Kummerow <farmerjoeblo AT hotmail.com>]

Hi Karl,

Let's consider some of what I wrote before. All synchronic language data 
acceptable in Australian English I hear around me.

(1) Elsie plodded along.

What is meant by (1) is not "slow", but "slow walking", ie dawdling.
Such a conceptualisation can be extended to acts of non-walking in the
form of [slowly perform action associated with x], where 'x' is
generally represented by an adjunct phrase.

(2) Elsie plodded through the exam.

What this means is that the meaning of "slow" associated with (1) can be 
cancelled in (2). That "plod" does not mean "slow" may be seen by (3)

(3) *Elsie slow through the exam.

Or if we provide a verbal example,

(4) Elsie slowed through the exam.

it would mean that as Elsie got further through the exam, she got slower 
and slower.

Perhaps because "plod" is associated with a walking action, it can also
loose the meaning of "slow" and designate instead something similar to
"tramping". So to use Yitzhak's example:

(5) Even though the horse was not afraid of the dead animal, he was
still pleased to be leaving and needed no urging to plod quickly downhill.

In (5) we see that "plod" can cooccur with "quickly". Now, Rolf said
that that to use an adverb like "slowing" in conjunction with "plod"
would be redundant, since "plod" already has this meaning as part of its
uncancellable meaning. However, if we substitute "quickly" for "slowly"
in the above example, we see that we have two very different
conceptualisations:

(6) Even though the horse was not afraid of the dead animal, he was
still pleased to be leaving and needed no urging to plod slowly downhill.

As such, we see that the notion of "slow" in relation to "plod" can in
fact undergo cancellation. The question for you and Rolf would be: what 
is the uncancellable meaning of "plod" for dialects of English which 
accept (5)? (For me, even (1) and (2) are not the same either as I 
indicated above.) This is a syncronic language question which can be 
answered without reference to your own dialect. No etymology or 
comparison to German is required!

If you want to assert that I am making some etymological fallacy, please 
demonstrate that I am wanting something other than a synchronic analysis 
of these examples and that I have presented something other than a 
synchronic analysis myself. All I want is the uncancellable meaning of 
"plod" to be shown. And if it can't, then the principal of semantics as 
uncancellable meaning is called into question.

Regards,
David Kummerow.