Re: R: Re: Greenberg's universals

On Fri, 15 Sep 2000, Raymond Brown wrote:

> At 9:31 pm -0400 14/9/00, Yoon Ha Lee wrote:
> >On Thu, 14 Sep 2000, Tim Smith wrote:
> >
> >> This brings up a point that I've wondered about for some time.  Are there
> >> any natlangs that have indefinite articles but no definite ones?  [....]
>
> >I'm teaching myself Turkish and the grammar *says* it has no definite
> >article.  So
> >
> >iyi at (good horse)
> >
> >means "the good horse" or "good horse."
> >
> >However, bir (Turkish for "1") can either be used as a number or as the
> >indefinite:
> >
> >iyi bir at (good a horse)
>
> Yes, but I'm pretty sure this is much like the use of 'quidam' one finds in
> Latin, another language with regular articles.  "equus" can mean either
> 'the horse' or 'a horse'; we can , if we deem it necessary, mark
> indefiniteness: 'equus quidam' "a horse".
>
> And IIRC yi (one) can be used in a similar way in Mandarin.
>
> But we can also mark definiteness in Latin, if we wish, by adding some
> demostrative, e.g. equus ille.
I don't know a lot, but the grammar I have does mention three
demonstratives (bu, o, su--I think, but the s has a squiggle coming down
from it) but when it translates phrases, "o at" is "that horse" but "at"
is "(the) horse."  Beats me.  :-p

YHL