On Fri, 20 Aug 1999 21:22:47 -0700 Jim Grossmann <steven@...>
writes:
>
>Isn't present perfect used instead of simple past in some languages?
>
>Jim
>
Yiddish's simple past is what looks like a present
perfect...."have"+participle.
"have" = hobn: hob / host / hot / hobn / hot / hobn
ix endig = i finish
ix hob geendigt = i finished / i have finished
du geist = you go
du host gegangen = you went / you have gone
As far as i remember from class, this is both the "simple past" and the
"present perfect" (although my teacher didn't use any terms nearly that
technical). I think someone mentioned on Conlang a while ago that German
uses a 'real' past tense. Does it also use its form of _hobn_ to make a
present perfect?
ANOTHER MESSAGE:
In a message dated 8/21/1999 12:23:28 AM, steven@OLYWA.NET writes:
>>Isn't present perfect used instead of simple past in some languages?
>Yes, in French for example, except in some literature, and......
maybe=20
>sometimes in Italian..... I can't remember anymore. :-(
>
>I wonder why in French, some verbs use one auxiliary (avoir-to have)
and=20
>others (around 20 intransitives) use another (=EAtre-to be). Actually,
didn'=
>t=20 English do this too at one point?
Yiddish does this. Contrast the above verbs with:
"be" = zain: bin / bist / iz / zainen / zait / zainen
mir zainen = we are
mir zainen geven = we were
er kumt = he comes
er iz gekumen = he came
-Stephen (Steg)
"hhalomot zeh b'emet"
___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.