Re: THEORY nouns and cases (was: Verbs derived from noun cases)

Tamas Racsko wrote:

>On 27 Apr 2004 Philippe Caquant <herodote92@...> wrote:
>
>
>
>>I think the English say something like "the proof of the pudding
>>is when you eat it". [...] That's what I suppose that a matchbox
>>doesn't belong to the same conceptual category as "red" or "to
>>burn"
>>
>>
>
>  Let's eat the pudding in Hungarian. It has a category called
>"nomenverba". If we take the Hungarian equivalent of "to burn",
>it's a nomenverbum: _e'g_. Use can use it both as a noun and both
>as verb. They share the same conceptual category in the language,
>just like a mathematical function. A function could have various
>actual output values depending on its input value(s), e.g. a single
>function like square root can result in an integer, a real number
>or a complex number. Logically, you have no different square root
>functions for the various output types. You may have a single
>concept "burn" -- a language function -- that has various
>parameters (i.e. input values). One of the possible parameters is
>the actual position in the sentence: is it a core of a noun phrase,
>a verbal phrase, etc.?
>
>
Ans also in the Celtic languages, I believe.  Though they call it a
'noun-verb'.  It represents the infinitive, or something.

Reply