Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Noun tense

From:Tristan McLeay <kesuari@...>
Date:Monday, July 22, 2002, 20:16
On Tue, 2002-07-23 at 05:14, Thomas R. Wier wrote:

> In general, I would disagree with the proposition that these > cliticized verb forms are evidence that English are likely > someday to mark tense on nouns. Evidence that they're still > clitics comes from grammatical constructions like the following: > > "The Man raving wildly's been rather active lately."
Does 'The man raving wildly's dog's been rather active lately.' not therefore cause problems with the possessive? Or, what *is* the possessive? Oh, and I never said it *would* happen in English, or even that it was likely, so you can't be disagreeing with me. I just said it *could* and so put it into my conlang. Also, something like 'you're' /jo:/ bares little/no phonological relationship to /j}:/+/{@,a:}/. I realise that doesn't mean much to people who say /ju:r/ etc, but does it mean that -'re is still merely a clitic? Tristan.

Reply

Thomas R. Wier <trwier@...>