Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Artyom Kouzminykh: Answers & proposal

From:Christophe Grandsire <grandsir@...>
Date:Monday, August 23, 1999, 10:52
Lars Henrik Mathiesen wrote:
> > > Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 11:09:34 +0200 > > From: Christophe Grandsire <grandsir@...> > > > I wonder if it is true. This makes perfect sense for > > English, but it is something impossible for French for example: > > "J'ai cuit de la viande" vs. "J'ai de la viande cuite". But maybe at > > an earlier stage French had the adjective before the noun (and > > before its article). > > Well, I cheated. The 'have'-construction did not arise in any of the > modern European languages, but sometime back in Proto-Romance and > Common Germanic times, or perhaps a bit later. (Neither family had > strict word order or mandatory articles back then). It just happens to > work in Modern English too. > > And it did used to have the participle agreeing with the object noun > phrase in gender and number, unlike the periphrastic perfect with 'is' > where it agreed with the subject. (Agreement getting lost as part of > grammaticalization is expected --- but what may be interesting is that > the 'have'-form generally lost it much earlier than the 'is'-form). >
We still have it in French, but only when the object takes place before the verb, when it's a personal object pronoun for example, or when it's a relative pronoun. I think in older times agreement was more important (I can't check it by now, but I will).
> Lars Mathiesen (U of Copenhagen CS Dep) <thorinn@...> (Humour NOT marked)
-- Christophe Grandsire Philips Research Laboratories -- Building WB 145 Prof. Holstlaan 4 5656 AA Eindhoven The Netherlands Phone: +31-40-27-45006 E-mail: