Re: Participles in Natlangs and in Conlangs

Eldin Raigmore wrote:
[snip]
> Consider the Latin gerundive; although it is a verbal noun rather than a
> verbal adjective,
No - the gerundive is most certainly an _adjective_.

It has endings for all three genders in both singular and plural, for
all cases. It is declined in fact just like the adjective 'bonus' and,
like all adjectives, must 'agrees' with a noun. But also, like all Latin
adjectives, it can be used substantively with the noun "understood", cf.
bona = a good things [neut, pl.]; agenda = things to be done.
bonus = a good person [masc. sing.]; honorandus = a person worthy of honor.

But it is certainly an adjective: epistulae mihi scribendae sunt = for
me there letters to be written = I must write some letters.

It will be seen that they are passive in meaning. At school we had it
drummed into us: "The gerundIVE is a passIVE adjectIVE."    :)

Traditionally the impersonal neuter gerundive of intransitive verbs
(such verbs could be used _impersonally_ with passive endings in Latin),
was also used the same way; e.g.
mihi eundum est = I must go
eundum erit = one/we/they/people will have to go
(cf. itur = Fr. 'on va')

One of the things that complicates matters is that in early Latin also
the neuter singular of the gerund could be used with a direct object!
So, for example, one could say:
epistulas mihi scribendum est = I must write letters.

In this use 'scribendum' is, in effect, an _active verbal noun_ - but
this then traditionally labeled a _gerund_ in Latin; it was, however,
strictly a substantivized neuter gerundive. It is clear that in early
Latin the gerundive was neutral as regards voice.

This use of the substantivized neuter gerundive or 'gerund' of
transitive verbs with a direct object was found in the Classical period
only as a conscious archaism in the poets Lucretius, Catullus & Vergil.
It is found only once in Cicero and thereafter never in prose.

> it basically inflects a verb "V" into a noun
> meaning "thing that somebody had better get around to V-ing one day."
No - it is more complicated than that. There are, as I shall show below,
two quite distinct uses of the gerundive in Latin.

> Examples; an agendum is a thing that needs doing, a memorandum is a thing
> that needs remembering, an explanandum is a thing that needs explaining, a
> definiendum is a thing that needs defining, and an Amanda is somebody who
> needs loving.
Not really - even in this usage (confined almost, tho not entirely, to
the nominative case) the meaning is 'capable of', 'susceptible of',
'prone to', 'ready for' etc.  'Amanda' is probably just "lovable".
Whether specific necessity is implied or not depends upon context.

But in the genitive, dative & ablative, and in the accusative after a
preposition, they did not normally convey _any_ of those meanings: *they
served as the oblique case of the infinitive*. The Latin infinitive
(verbal noun) was indeclinable could be used only as a nominative and
_plain_ accusative, the rest was supplied by the gerund (if
intransitive) or gerundive (if transitive), e.g.
                  (a) INTRANSITIVE
Nominative      legere facile est = Reading is easy/ It's easy to read
Accusative      legere amo = I like reading/ I like to read
Prep. + Acc.    ad legendum abiit = he went off (in order) to read
Genitive        ars legendi = the art of reading
Dative          legendo studet = he is fond of reading
Ablative        legendo multa didicit = he learnt much by reading
Prep. + Abl.    de legendo nihil nouit = he knew nothing about reading

                  (b) TRANSITIVE
Nominative      libros legere facile est = Reading books is easy
Accusative      libros legere amo = I like reading books etc
Prep. + Acc.    ad libros legendos abiit = he went off to read books
Genitive        ars librorum legendorum = the art of reading books
Dative          libris legendis studet = he is fond of reading books
Ablative        libris legendis multa didicit = he learnt much by
reading books
Prep. + Abl.    de libris legendis nihil nouit = he knew nothing about
reading books

Just to add to the fun, in the genitive & ablative cases (but not the
accusative & dative), it was perhaps equally common to use the gerund
with direct object! So for the above we can also have:
                  (c) TRANSITIVE (alternative gen. & abl. constructions)

Nominative      libros legere facile est = Reading books is easy
Accusative      libros legere amo = I like reading books etc
Prep. + Acc.    ad libros legendos abiit = he went off to read books
Genitive        ars libros legendi = the art of reading books
Dative          libris legendis studet = he is fond of reading books
Ablative        libros legendo multa didicit = he learnt much by reading
books
Prep. + Abl.    de libros legendo nihil nouit = he knew nothing about
reading books

The plain ablative of the gerund in fact came in later Latin to be used
as an indeclinable present participle   :)

It is from this use of the ablative of the gerund (i.e. substantivized
neuter gerundive) that the 'present participles' of Portuguese, Spanish
& Italian are derived. The French present participle derives partly from
this and partly from the Latin present participle since in French the
two became indistinguishable through phonetic attrition of final sounds.

Also, to add even more fun, while the origin of the Latin present
present and past participles endings are clearly of IE origin and have
related forms in other IE languages, no satisfactory explanation has
been offered for the origin of the gerundive -nd- endings.

--
Ray
==================================
ray@carolandray.plus.com
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
"A mind which thinks at its own expense will always
interfere with language."         J.G. Hamann, 1760

Reply