Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Analogy: cases & prepositions; verbal inflection & adverbs

From:Danny Wier <dawier@...>
Date:Thursday, June 15, 2000, 1:36
>From: Matthew Kehrt <matrix14@...>
>Hmmm... >Today, I finally figured out how to make my prepositions work. I made >them all into cases. Every preposition except for "of", which is an >exception, has its own case. This actually allows me to pull my lang, >Eviendad"il, into a much more cohesive whole by establishing an overall >pattern for my cases.
No case for "of"? What do you do for genitive? Ed Heil wrote:
>Essentially a "case" is nothing but a preposition fused to the verb >and charged with grammatical necessity. Grammaticized, as they say. >Made into a small and fixed class and made necessary. But >semantically, cases tend to do similar work to >prepositions/postpositions. Indeed, our beloved PIE case-endings are >almost certainly the grammaticized remnants of fused postpositions.
I read that too. In fact, many IE-ists (and Nostratists) believe that Indo-European went through an ergative state, reflected possibly in Anatolian (Hittite et al). Though I'm not absolutely sure about Nostratic (the theory *is* backed up with some convincing evidence and has been proposed by more than a few linguists and the theory is almost a century old), I do believe in a Kartvelian-IE-Uralic connection *at least*. (They do have similar case endings and pronouns; I outta post a comparison of Georgian, Finnish and Hungarian with varius IE languages just for grins...) In primitive IE, as with Uralic, Altaic, Dravidian and Kartvelian, case endings are all suffixal bound morphemes, but Nostratic recreates unbound postpositions which become prepositions in Afro-Asiatic. How Sanskrit has eight cases, Hungarian has seventeen, and Georgan has seven, just came from natural evolution from the prototype. I outta make an *attempt* at a reconstructed Nostratic (or perhaps Proto-Language?) case reconstruction, which would probably result in a large number of simple suffixes and a single declension most likely, since Turkic languages have the same case endings for singular and plural (the latter adds the -ler-/-lar- plural marker before the case marker). Somehow Ugric got two sets of case endings for singular and plural, and both Uralic and Altaic developed vowel harmony (which creates multiple declensions *in a way*). Indo-European, however, split nouns according to animate-inanimate noun class, as Dravidian did. Then IE emerged with masculine and feminine subclasses for animates, like Afro-Asiatic did for all nouns. Mixed with the case endings (and I'm not really sure there were originally the eight cases of Sanskrit; it could've been more in fact), the three genders became the five declensions of Latin (which originally had seven cases!), and some number of declensions of Sanskrit; I wish I knew how many... (whatever happened to Skrintha anyway?) DaW. ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com