Re: "Roumant", or whatever it may be called. Part VI
|From:||Vasiliy Chernov <bc_@...>|
|Date:||Friday, December 1, 2000, 18:32|
On Thu, 30 Nov 2000 16:21:52 +0100, Christophe Grandsire
Oh, you don't fear homonymy, do you? ;)
>but some categories of verbs allow the use of other particles for simple
>negation. For instance, verbs of movement or transformation often use pas/pa/:
>"not a step", etymologically identical to French "pas" and to "Roumant"pas:
>step, while verbs of speech use mostly the particle palavre /pa'lavr/: "nota
>word". However, this last particle, from its length, keeps some of its
>insistance value. So, the phrase: "ne dic palavre" means more "I don't saya
>word" than "I don't say".
Interesting. I feel there can be funny shades involved with
different negations for same verb.
>Ne also has a so-called
>emphatic form nõ /nO~/ which, used instead of ne, but still needing asecond
>part (when nõ is used instead of ne, reim is often omitted however), means:
>not at all, absolutely not, not even. Nõ also means "no" and is opposedthen to
>ouc /u/: yes. This use of unstressed ne or stressed nõ looks a lot like theuse
>of "ne" and "non" in Old French. Yet I didn't know Old French could use"non"
>instead of "ne" with verbs when I devised this feature :) .
For those less versed in Old French (like me), any details?
What do you use when the verb itself is omitted?