Re: Grammatical Summary of Kemata
| From: | Christophe Grandsire <christophe.grandsire@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Thursday, December 13, 2001, 10:33 |
|---|
En réponse à Almaran Dungeonmaster <dungeonmaster@...>:
>
> In elementary school, Dutch children learn the nine copula verbs of
> the
> dutch language.Some of them are archaic, but they all express some form
> of
> equality between the two subjects. In Dutch, they are:
>
Do you mean you're taught to consider them as copulae?!!! I would never have
thought of that... In French, the corresponding verbs are just treated as
normal verbs and not even compared to the copula "être".
> -zijn (to be)
> -worden (to become, i.e. to be in the future)
Those two I can understand, since they can also be used as auxiliaries.
> -blijven (to remain, i.e. to be now and in the future)
I can understand this one too. After all, the copula estar of Spanish comes
from the spatial verb "stare" in Latin.
> -blijken (turn out to be, i.e. two things were alreayd the same, but it
> only
> shows now)
> -lijken (seem to be, the facts seem to indicate that two things are
> equal)
> -schijnen (seem to be, the rest of the world seems to think the things
> are
> equal)
>
Thanks! I have learned them but I never really understood what difference they
had. Now I do!
BTW, don't you use the preposition "op" with "lijken"? At least that's what
I've been taught. IMO that would rule it out as a copula.
> More archaic forms:
>
> -heten (are said to be, the rest of the world says the two things are
> equal)
> -dunken (are thought to be, the speaker has concluded the two things
> are
> equal, usually also with a direct object)
> -voorkomen (seem to be, the appearance suggests that the two things
> are
> equal)
>
Is it homophonous to voorkomen: to prevent, or is it VOORkomen, with detachable
voor?
Christophe.
http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr
Take your life as a movie: do not let anybody else play the leading role.
Replies