>I would like to use telicity as a example.
The book "A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics" 4th ed, by David
Crystal (2001) says that telicity refers "to an event where the activity has
a clear terminal point. Telic verbs include fall, kick, and make". Let us
look at the Hebrew equivalents for two of these verbs, namely, BR) (create)
and NPL (fall). I am quite sure that Hebrew children knew that the end was
Looking at the ancient Hebrew isn't useful, because we don't know the
answer. Rather, I think, we should look at English, and see that the
claim doesn't hold up. Based on that, I think we have to assume that
it doesn't hold up in Hebrew, either (or, indeed, in any language of
which I am aware).
Regarding "fall": "The Devil created an endless pit and Korah fell
forever, never hitting bottom." (Please forgive the fanciful content
of my example.) Your assertion
something was made. And when NPL was used, every child knew that the person
or thing falling would not remain in the air, but would meet some kind of
end.
just seems wrong.
So I ask: Are there situations where the telicity of BR) and NPL can be
blotted out or changed by the context?
Yes. That's my point.
-Joel
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.