Sprachsbund was Re: Question
|From:||Wesley Parish <wes.parish@...>|
|Date:||Wednesday, April 17, 2002, 11:18|
Consider the Hispanic Peninsular languages - they were in a Sprachsbund with
Arabic once. It's more than likely they took some of their more endearing
complications from the Arabic of that period. Perhaps your Reman is/could be
fitted into such a conculture? Just a thought.
On Wednesday 17 April 2002 23:00, you wrote:
Mau e ki, "He aha to mea nui?"
You ask, "What is the most important thing?"
Maku e ki, "He tangata, he tangata, he tangata!"
I reply, "It is people, it is people, it is people!"
> En réponse à Wesley Parish <wes.parish@...>:
> > I just checked some old work I'd done learning Arabic via the
> > Colloquial
> > Arabic threesome - Colloquial Arabic (Levantine), Colloquial Egyptian
> > Arabic
> > and Colloquial Gulf Arabic, and in Gulf Arabic the only time you get a
> > SVO is
> > in a subordinate sentence, eg, "gilt lih ina Jaasim raaH il-bayt" - "I
> > told
> > him that Jaasim had gone home." The rest of the time it is straight
> > VSO.
> Yep, the famous particle inna (in Classical Arabic), which, like its
> "sisters" (Arabic terminology) must mandatorily be followed by a noun,
> making sentences that follow it mandatorily SVO. But not only that, but in
> Classical Arabic where you still mark case, the noun following inna, though
> a subject, must be in direct case, or accusative :)) . My Reman has a
> similar structure for its subclauses too: since in Reman the distinction
> between prepositions and conjunctions has disappeared, conjunctions must be
> followed by a mandatory noun, which, when it's a personal pronoun, must be
> in indirect object form. And think that Reman is a Romance language :))) .
> Take your life as a movie: do not let anybody else play the leading role.