On Nov 29, 2015 06:00, "Mulaik, Stanley A" <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>

> Italiano: Essere privo di q.c.: "Gli manca di coraggio" (Ille manca de
corage).

No. Le pronomine "gli" es del objecto indirecte. Dunque "gli manca" *NON*
significa "ille manca"; isto significa "le manca" o "manca ad ille".

(Henceforth in English, so as to be as clear as possible to Stan.)

It has been put to you many times that the subject of the verb “mancare" in
Italian is that which is not present -- this is so  even if the language
allows the subject to be a prepositional phrase. The point is that that
verb means "to not be present", as does the Interlingua verb "mancar".

There does exist a transitive use of the Italian "mancare" that translates
to the English "to miss" as in "to miss a bus". But we express this in
Interlingua with "perder"; so this does not enter into the usage of the
Interlingua verb "mancar".

Most important, you must stop invoking the English usage of "to lack" to
mean "to not have". This has absolutely no place in the discussion.

The fact that the IED used the word "lack" in its definition of "mancar"
does not justify basing an analysis of "mancar" on the meaning of "to lack"
("to not have") that is unique to English. The IED says "to be lacking";
this clearly means *only* "to not be present". Stop pretending otherwise.

Al altere lectores io pete pardono pro mi usage extensive del anglese in
iste message.

Ferdinand


--
Pro leger le archivos e pro modificar o cancellar le subscription:
http://listserv.icors.org/archives/interlng.html