There are 4 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1.1. Re: Sold here / for sale / on sale / on sale here
From: Leonardo Castro
2.1. Re: Is Esperanto Indo-European?
From: Padraic Brown
3.1. Re: Vocalic alternation (was: Is Esperanto Indo-European?)
From: C. Brickner
3.2. Re: Vocalic alternation (was: Is Esperanto Indo-European?)
From: R A Brown
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1.1. Re: Sold here / for sale / on sale / on sale here
Posted by: "Leonardo Castro" [email protected]
Date: Sat Jun 8, 2013 4:35 am ((PDT))
2013/6/7 <[email protected]>:
> Leonardo Castro <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
> > > For sale = typically a sign for a private sale of something like a
> house or
>>
>> > a boat or car or a sale on someone else's behalf eg. Real estate sale
>> > etc.
>> por-BR: "À venda."
>
>
>
> Doesn't Spanish use "se vende" for this? (= it sells itself.)
Probably.
In por-BR, it's also used "Vende-se [<item>]." or "Vendem-se
[<itens>].". The use of plural "vendem" to concord with the plural
objects is polemical.
Prescriptive grammar says that the use of "se" in this case doesn't
mean "itself" but it's just a "pronome apassivador" that put the
sentence into the passive voice: "vendem-se casas" = "casas são
vendidas" (houses are sold).
(The particle "se" can have different functions:
http://www.portugues.com.br/gramatica/as-funcoes-se-.html)
But some modern linguists argue that the expression "vende-se" was
reinterpreted by everybody as "someone sells", so the verb should
concord with "someone" and be singular.
So it's "Vende-se casa." (liberal linguists) vs. "Vendem-se casas."
(conservative grammaticists).
I don't know if something similar happens in Spanish.
>
> --Ph. D.
Até mais!
Leonardo
Messages in this topic (28)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2.1. Re: Is Esperanto Indo-European?
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" [email protected]
Date: Sat Jun 8, 2013 4:48 am ((PDT))
--- On Fri, 6/7/13, MorphemeAddict <[email protected]> wrote:
> It doesn't seem like a big stretch of
> the meaning of "descended" to apply
> it to Esperanto from IE. Only the mechanism of descent is
> different.
I think it's the mechanism itself that keeps bespoke languages from being
slotted with those that arose naturally.
> Instead of a natural progression of mostly unconscious usage
> by many people over the years, one person picked and chose various
> elements of various languages, along with some ad hoc creations of his
> own, and made a coherent whole of it.
Yep. That would be the general reason why it's not "descended from" so
much "kitbashed from".
> So, even though Esperanto is not IE in the sense that French
> or Russian is, it could still be considered IE in this slightly different
> way.
Sure. As I recall from the last time this came up, no one really had an
issue with calling such languages "artificial IE" or "constructed IE"
or some such designation.
I'm not so sure E-o's grammar will allow it to be easily slotted in the
IE family, though. I think this has been a point of contention against
E-o.
>
> stevo
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Jim Henry <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 7:09 PM, Leonardo Castro <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > Can a conlang be classified into the conventional
> natlang families?
> >
> > There's been some discussion of this here or on AUXLANG
> in the past.
> > The consensus seems to be that "Indo-European" is a
> *genetic* term,
> > and only languages *descended* from proto-IE are
> Indo-European in the
> > strict sense. Conlangs, however much vocabulary
> they borrow from a
> > given natlang or group of natlangs, aren't descended
> from it in the
> > way natural daughter languages are.
> >
> > And just judging by resemblance to Indo-European
> languages, Esperanto
> > is IE in vocabulary, and to a large extent in syntax,
> but arguably not
> > so much in morphology.
> >
> > --
> > Jim Henry
> > http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry/
> > http://www.jimhenrymedicaltrust.org
> >
>
Messages in this topic (51)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3.1. Re: Vocalic alternation (was: Is Esperanto Indo-European?)
Posted by: "C. Brickner" [email protected]
Date: Sat Jun 8, 2013 5:44 am ((PDT))
I've always like the example: Venezuela, venezolano.
Charlie
----- Original Message -----
--- On Sat, 6/8/13, R A Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
> > It could be that Romance carries some of those over into
> > the modern languages.
>
> But by that time they were regarded as independent words.
> The various vowel alternations that are found in the
> Romance languages, e.g. Spanish verbs with -ie- ~ -e- ~ i
> alternation, and _-ue- ~ -o- ~ -u- alternation, are the
> result of _regular_ development of Vulgar Latin vowels in
> different phonetic environments. They are nothing
> whatsoever to do with IE ablaut, nor with umlaut of any
> kind.
Right. As with the French example, these have to do with the treatment
of stressed vowels. As I recall, stressed long o becomes ue and stressed
long e becomes ie. Thus pó:to > puedo while in the infinitive and 1&2
plural, the stress shifts to the ending: potére > poder. In school, we
learned these as "boot" verbs. Because the usual arrangement of the
conjugation looks something like a boot, especially when the altered
vowel forms are outlined.
This isn't confined to verbs of course: Puerto Rico (a nice agglomeration
of Latin and Visigothic that!) shows the same variation.
> Ray
Welcome back, by the way!
Padraic
Messages in this topic (51)
________________________________________________________________________
3.2. Re: Vocalic alternation (was: Is Esperanto Indo-European?)
Posted by: "R A Brown" [email protected]
Date: Sat Jun 8, 2013 6:06 am ((PDT))
On 08/06/2013 12:35, Padraic Brown wrote:
> --- On Sat, 6/8/13, R A Brown wrote:
[snip]
>> The various vowel alternations that are found in the
>> Romance languages, e.g. Spanish verbs with -ie- ~ -e-
>> ~ i alternation, and _-ue- ~ -o- ~ -u- alternation,
>> are the result of _regular_ development of Vulgar Latin
>> vowels in different phonetic environments. They are
>> nothing whatsoever to do with IE ablaut, nor with
>> umlaut of any kind.
>
> Right. As with the French example, these have to do with
> the treatment of stressed vowels.
Exactly!
> As I recall, stressed long o becomes ue and stressed long
> e becomes ie.
Stressed _short_ o in fact - and, unlike similar treatments
in French & Italian, it happened whether the syllable was
blocked or free.
> Thus pó:to > puedo
No - *potÅ /'pÉto/ --> puedo
> while in the infinitive and 1&2 plural, the stress shifts
> to the ending: potére > poder.
Yep - *potÄre /pÉ'terÉ/ --> poder
Yep.
[snip]
> This isn't confined to verbs of course: Puerto Rico (a
> nice agglomeration of Latin and Visigothic that!) shows
> the same variation.
Yep - _puerto_ <-- port(m)
Yes, it shows up in all parts of speech.
In fact in verbs analogy has got rid of some of the
irregular forms that were created by regular phonetic
development, e.g. the 1st and second plural present of
_aimer_ are no longer _amons_ and _amez_ as they were in
earlier French :)
> Welcome back, by the way!
Thanks.
=========================================================
On 08/06/2013 13:44, C. Brickner wrote:
> I've always like the example: Venezuela, venezolano.
Yes, that's a nice example.
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
"language ⦠began with half-musical unanalysed expressions
for individual beings and events."
[Otto Jespersen, Progress in Language, 1895]
Messages in this topic (51)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
