Re: Cases and Prepositions (amongst others)

Raymond Brown wrote:

> >> "From here"?
> >
> >Of course, "here" in this case is used substantively, not adverbially.
>
> Sorry, gentleman, but this looks to mean horribly like a "vicious circle"
> argument.
>
> "here" is normally classed as an adverb.
> So what are we saying?
> (a) prepositions never govern adverbs;
> (b) so in the phrase 'from here', 'here' is a substantive.
> (c) why is it a substantive here?
> (d) because it is governed by a preposition.
Except, who's saying "here" was originally an adverb? Why not say 'here' originally
referred simply to a substantive relation, and by means of the derivational 'null-morpheme'
(such as when we get:  "It's a hit!"  from "to hit"), it *can* be used adverbially?

I realize that sounds ad hoc; it would be if it weren't for the fact you can't explain
vast segments of English derivational morphology without it.  Note also that (almost)
all adverbs in a closely related language, German, do not have any overt morphological
change when they're derived from another part of speech, such as adjectives.
So, why can't substantives undergo an analogous change, when we do know that
examples of substantive use exists outside the question under discussion,
adverbs with prepositions?

(cf.  "Here is where I want to be."; also, the increasingly frequent use of "there" +
a form of "be" with consistently singular agreement is, I suspect, motivated by a
change of part of speech from adverb to substantive.)

> I've never seem either the Vulgar Latin phrases nor the Spanish one so
> described before - rather I've seen them called 'composite adverbs'.  So
> why ain't 'from here' a composite adverb also?
I'm not saying they're impossible;  only, that I don't think that describes English
syntax.

======================================
Tom Wier <artabanos@...>
ICQ#: 4315704   AIM: trwier
"Cogito ergo sum, sed credo ergo ero."
======================================