Re: Gz^rod|in (Some grammar now : articles)
|From:||Adrian Morgan <morg0072@...>|
|Date:||Tuesday, March 14, 2000, 23:55|
Christophe Grandsire wrote, quoting someone
(silly interface doesn't allow me to check who):
> >It seems to me that an article that expresses
> >number and person of the subject as well as
> modus/tempus of the verb might be considered an
> >auxiliary verb as well.
Owing to my _very_ elementary grasp of formal
grammar I don't really understand a lot of
the terminology in this post. If you think any
of it might be useful to me wrt writing the
Gz^rod|in documentation, then I could do with
a little explanation. Point me to a good website
if that's the easiest way.
> I think that such a construction exists in
> Basque. So it's not that artificial. (You might
> argue that Basque is a n unnatural language
> though :-))..
> Well, Basque is a little different, it uses a
> periphrastic conjugation for most of its verbs,
> with the auxiliaries corresponding to 'to have'
> and 'to be' (I don't remember the forms though),
> and a few other defective ones. Those
> auxiliaries are really like verbs and are used
> as verbs in their one right too (with
> periphrastic constructions for future for
> example). So it's a little different. But it's
> true that such kinds of articles could be the
> origin of real auxiliaries in a later state of
> the language (let's say... within 6
> generations? :) ).--