Re: Subordinate clauses
|From:||Sally Caves <scaves@...>|
|Date:||Saturday, June 26, 2004, 14:41|
Sorry!! I'm been known to write wiht, too, for "with." My humble
apologies!! Yry eftoihs...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carsten Becker" <post@...>
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 7:01 AM
Subject: Re: Subordinate Clauses
> From: "John Cowan" <cowan@CCIL.ORG <mailto:cowan@...>>
> Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 3:48 PM
> Subject: Re: Subordinate Clauses
> > Carsten Becker scripsit:
> > > "Der Hund mit dem Mann" still does not make sense, even with the
> > > given. It must be "des Mannes". That's the only right possiblity. In
> > > English you wouldn't say "the dog with the man was green" either,
> > > dog who was with the man was green" would be a valid possibility of
> > > course.
> > I don't have any problem with "The dog with the man was green"; it has
> > to be about the dog, and it sounds perfectly idiomatic. OTOH, maybe
> > I've been thinking about green men and dogs for too long.
> Actually, I just intended to say that here "mit" wouldn't be used here.
> You simply cannot say this in German in that way. A 1:1 translation does
> not work here. It's rather "... den der Mann dabei hatte" or so if you
> insist on keeping "with".
> I'm sorry to have mixed up you others.
> And, Sally, I *am* written with a "C", except you made the name fit to
> Teonaht's phonology of course. But it's true, both ways of writing
> "Carsten" exist, and both versions are pronounced ["ka6stn]. AFAIK it's
> a worn-down form of Christian, coming from northern Germany. At least
> that's what my parents explained when I asked them what my name means
> perhaps about 10 years ago.