Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: 'and' clitic in Latin (-que) and Kalaallisut (-lu)

From:Henrik Theiling <theiling@...>
Date:Thursday, April 15, 2004, 9:59

Thanks for all your answers!

Ray Brown <ray.brown@...> writes:
>... > > Brutus venit Caesarque vincit. > > Correct. > > > Brutus venit Caesar vincitque. > > Not correct. ... >...
Ok! Then I conclude: a) Latein -que == Kalaallisut -lu: coordination of any kind, suffix to the first word of the second phrase b) I was completely wrong of what is 'natural' and indeed intuitively introduced quite an unnatural and unlikely way of coordination in my conlang. I still have the question whether there are languages that mark this type of 'and'-coordination on the head of the second phrase? Is it totally unnatural or does some(a) natlang (already) do it (except worse (tm))? **Henrik PS:
> Brutus venit ac Caesar vincit.
Ah, ok, 'ac' is short of 'atque'.
> Brutus venit nec Caesar non vincit. [A delightful negation of a negation!]
Hehe. :-)
> neque _or_ nec.
I also did not know 'neque'. Shame on me... Should have paid more attention in school. :-)
> and.... no one = nec... quisquam > [adj.] = nec... ullus, nec ...ulla etc > and.... never = nec... umquam > etc. > > But 'nec....non' = 'and not.....not' = 'and in fact....." :)
> Hope this helps
Yes, definitely! :-) **Henrik