Re: do be do be do

>> My French lecturer recently said that every language needs teh verbs be
>and
>> have.
>>
>> I quickly disillusioned him, but I was wondering about the verb 'do'. How
>> essential is it? AN ddoes its essentiallity change in languages which
make
>> do without be or have?
>
>"to do", I don't know but surely on the auxiliary use of "to do" many
>languages live without it (actually I only know English for having it but
my
>knoledge is quite small).  On the wildcard use (the pro-verb), I guess any
>language could formulate the question "what are you doing?" but I could
>imagine that a language full of preverbs or auxiliary could manage a way of
>asking that without using a verb.

In Japanese, 'suru/to do' is used even more than in English. A vast number
of nouns can be made into verbs by tacking suru on the end. Of course, it
isnt an auxiliary verb i the same way it is in English. It is auxiliary to a
noun instead of a verb.

shinpai - anxiety
shinpai suru - to worry

watashi no benkyou wa shinpai suru na.
(As for) my studies, (I) worry do [emph].

But what I was after was an example of a language where there is no do verb.
What could be used instead?

---
Fabian
Rule One: Question the unquestionable,
ask the unaskable, eff the ineffable,
think the unthinkable, and screw the inscrutable.