Re: Translation pattern of `to have'?
| From: | Dzheph Uatzon <az1980jjw@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Friday, March 2, 2001, 7:06 |
|---|
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'?
>
Attic Greek, in which the copula is optional in the present tense (as in
russian, I gather), puts the possesee in the nominative case and the possesor
in the dative, i.e.:
Emoi bios ti (esti)
me(dat) life a (is).
"I have a life"
Strangely enough, Greek also has a normal verb "to have" (Exô), which is
equivalent in meaning to using the dative but has a greater emphasis
pragmatically:
Bion ti exô.
life(acc) a have-1s
"I have a life"
Irish Gaelic (VSO) uses a copula and preceeds the possessor by the
preposition "at" (which is inflected for person):
Ta an sciann agam
Is the knife at-me
"I have the knife"
One of my languages, Laspraxo, uses the Greek-type construction, but puts the
possessee in the accusative even when the dative is used:
Pipron mjou = Cjenes mir pipron
Pepper to-me Have I pepper
"I have pepper"
Overall it seems using either the dative or a preposition of movement-towards
for the possessor is a very, very common alternative in languages without a
verb for have, (and even in languages with such a verb).
Your honored 1st time poster,
Jeff Watson
Reply