Re: Translation pattern of `to have'?
| From: | Tommie L Powell <tommiepowell@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Thursday, March 1, 2001, 6:51 |
|---|
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 01:00:25 +0100 Henrik Theiling <theiling@...>
writes:
> Hi!
>
> I'd like to know what ways exist of rendering the verb `to have' in
> other languages (both natural and constructed).
>
> I know the following:
> Some langs have a special verb `to have':
> E: I have a car.
> SV: Jag har en bil.
> NL: Ik heb een auto.
> DT: Ich habe ein Auto.
> F: J'ai une voiture.
>
> This verb is not restricted to IE languages:
> MC: Wo3 you3 che1.
>
> Many languages do not use `to have':
> FIN: Minulla on auto.
> RU: U minya yest' avtomobil'.
>
> I'd like to know what concepts there are in general. The language
> I
> am currently constructing is isolating, has no copula, is very
> regular, is All-Nouns and has active case marking. Is there a
> typical
> way for such a language to render `to have'?
>
I also am currently constructing a conlang that's isolating, has
no copula, is very regular and has active case marking. (It isn't
All-Noun, but is All-Noun except for modifiers.) Here's how I
handle the concept of 'to have' (as in owning or possessing):
I created a special category of Nouns which are "persons": The
underlying idea is that only "persons" can own or possess things.
One thing that a person can own is his or her own body.
(Things don't "own" bodies: Their bodies are all they are.)
I have a pair of prefixes that can be translated as "on" and "off".
If both X and Y are things, either can be on or off the other,
so "X onY" means X is on Y, "X offY" means X isn't on Y,
"Y onX" means Y is on X, and "Y offX" means Y isn't on X.
Like things, persons can also be located. So, if X is a person
and Y is a thing, "X onY" also means X is on Y, and "X offY"
also means X isn't on Y. But if X is a thing and Y is a person,
"X onY" means X is on that possessor (so Y possesses X),
and "X offY" means X isn't on that possessor (so Y lacks X).
If you want to say that a thing is on or off a person's body
(or on or off any part of his or her body), you have to say so,
instead of just saying that it's on or off the person.
-- Tommie
Replies