Philippe Caquant said:
> I find the idea of a verb meaning for ex "to be a dog"
> unsatisfactory.
Perhaps, but a great many languages have words that work just like that.
> But what I mean is that, if you have a verb meaning
> "to be a dog", first this can mean several things:
> - A chinchilla is a dog (a kind-of a dog)
> - Rex is a dog (an instance of a dog)
> - He is a dog (he behaves like a dog)
> - (probably more)
You see the following kind of thing all over the world's languages:
rekusu bauvau
Rex Dog
"Rex is a dog."
rekusu tSamp@
Rex Eat
"Rex is eating."
rekusu bauvauno:p
Rex Dog-NEG
"Rex is not a dog."
rekusu tSamp@no:p
Rex Eat-NEG
"Rex is not eating."
rekusu mEbibauvau
Rex POS-Dog
"Rex might be a dog."
rekusu mEbitSamp@
Rex POS-Eat
"Rex might be eating."
rekusu dEnbauvau
Rex PAST-Dog
"Rex was a dog."
rekusu dEntSamp@
Rex PAST-Eat
"Rex was eating."
rekusu dEnbauvauno:p
Rex PAST-Dog-NEG
"Rex was not a dog."
rekusu dEntSamp@no:p
Rex PAST-Eat-NEG
"Rex was not eating."
> Then why wouldn't we have verbs like:
> - to be black (Rex has an external colour property of
> black: Rex blacks ?)
> - to be tired (Rex is tired, he is in a temporary
> physical state of tireness: Rex tires ?)
> - to be happy (Rex is in a temporary mental state of
> happiness: Rex happies ?)
> - to be dead (Rex is in a definite [irreversible]
> state of being-dead: Rex deads ?)
> - to be playful (Rex had a playful behaviour: Rex
> playfuls ?)
These are called "stative verbs" when they're being described as verbs,
and a great many languages (including all the varieties of Chinese I've
seen) have them in great number.
There are "adjectives" that work this way in Japanese that could be
described as stative verbs with a little extra willpower.
> - to be in another place (spatial concept: Rex absents
> ?)
rekusu dIsplesno:p
Rex PROX-LOC-NEG
"Rex is not here."
> - to be the son of (Rex was Lassie's son: Rex sonned
> Lassie ?)
I've seen a bivalent stative verb that means "father of"; don't recall
seeing "son" anywhere, but it wouldn't surprise me at all.
> - to be married (Rex's master is in a particular
> social relation with somebody: Rex's master marrieds
> ?)
I wouldn't be suprised to find a verb with that meaning.
> So in the end, nearly everything could be a verb, but
> what is it good ? (sorry: everything verbables, but
> what goods it ?)
Who cares what good it is? In the world's languages, nearly everything
*can* be a verb, and that's that. It's something you learn to live with.
:)
> (Imagine for ex you have a verb meaning: to come on
> the next day [to nextdaycome]...)
That wouldn't surprise me in the least, although I don't recall
encountering a lexical form with that meaning anywhere.
Lots of languages have ways of putting that meaning into a multi-morpheme
word, though.
-- Mark
Polymathix
San Antonio, TX