general arrowhead

[Charles Butler]

This is EXCELLENT,  I would definitely agree with your "classifier" example, as it is what I mean by "feel".  If it feels like the "object between" it would matter to me whether it was a ball or a piece of lumber a yard wide, it's the "thing" that is moving, not the hands which hold its ends.

iroald at HOTMAIL.COM wrote:                        

      

      

    I must have expressed myself clumsily, as I think that the first rule is the oldest one, the one we all have adhered to. It is excemplified in the first of these signs.     The second rule is excemplified in the second sign, and the third rule in the third sign (entered into the Norwegian dictionary by Val, while I was visiting and we were discussing this)     The fourt rule on my list was in one of the grammar sentences in the last week, I will find it.     And no, I would not write \\\'POSSIBLE\\\' with the general arrowhead, as it follows none of my suggested rules.     Hope this clarifies     Ingvild     The first of this signs is two cars crusing along. Evebn if the two hands happens to be in a classifier shape, that is not the reason for choosing the general arrowhead, it is just simply that it is not possible to write two arrows on top of each other, the two hands are painting the same path.   The second sign is a standard sign meaning \\\'identity\\\' or \\\'to i!
 dentify
 with\\\'. The two hands are touching throughout the 

  
---------------------------------
  +[to-biler-følger-hverandre%20identitet_2%20løfte]%0D%0A>+I%20must%20have%20expressed%20myself%20clumsily,%20as%20I%20think%20that%20the%20first%20rule%20is%20the%20oldest%20one,%20the%20one%20we%20all%20have%20adhered%20to.%20It%20is%20excemplified%20in%20the%20first%20of%20these%20signs.%0D%0A>+%0D%0A>+The%20second%20rule%20is%20excemplified%20in%20the%20second%20sign,%20and%20the%20third%20rule%20in%20the%20third%20sign%20(entered%20into%20the%20Norwegian%20!
 dictionary%20by%20Val,%20while%20I%20was%20visiting%20and%20we%20were%20discussing%20this)%0D%0A>+%0D%0A>+The%20fourt%20rule%20on%20my%20list%20was%20in%20one%20of%20the%20grammar%20sentences%20in%20the%20last%20week,%20I%20will%20find%20it.%0D%0A>+%0D%0A>+And%20no,%20I%20would%20not%20write%20\\\'POSSIBLE\\\'%20with%20the%20general%20arrowhead,%20as%20it%20follows%20none%20of%20my%20suggested%20rules.%0D%0A>+%0D%0A>+Hope%20this%20clarifies%0D%0A>+%0D%0A>+Ingvild%0D%0A>+%0D%0A>+The%20first%20of%20this%20signs%20is%20two%20cars%20crusing%20along.%20Evebn%20if%20the%20two%20hands%20happens%20to%20be%20in%20a%20classifier%20%20shape,%20that%20is%20not%20the%20reason%20for%20choosing%20the%20general%20arrowhead,%20it%20is%20just%20simply%20that%20it%20is%20not%20possible%20to%20write%20two%20arrows%20on%20top%20of%20each%20other,%20the%20two%20hands%20are%20painting%20the%20same%20path.%0D%0A>+The%20second%20sign%20is%20a%20standard%20sign%20meaning%20\\\'identity\\\'%20or%20\\!
 \'to%20id
entify%20with\\\'.%20The%20two%20hands%20are%20touching%20throughout%20the%20">Reply to this message  
---------------------------------
      Courtesy of SignBank.org 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/sw-l/attachments/20060311/3b57c7d0/attachment.html>