> Ray Brown wrote:
>
>Example:
>eo imperium tenente, euentum timeo
>he-ABL power-ACC hold-PRES.PART-ABL
>With him holding power, I fear the outcome
>>caeruleancentaur wrote:
>> I notice that, in the two examples you give, the topic of the
>> absolute construction is not the same as the subject of the main
>> clause. Is it correct to say that this is the rule with absolute
>> constructions? Thus, one couldn't say: With me holding power, I
>>fear the outcome, or With Caesar being leader, he shall fear
>>nothing.
>>
>> Have I understood this correctly?
>>>"Ph. D." <phild@A...> wrote:
>>>This is certainly true for Classical Latin. The topic of the
>>>absolute cannot refer to the subject or object of the main clause.
>>>Eum imperium tenentem timeo.
>>>he-ACC power-ACC hold-PRES.PART-ACC fear-PRES-1SG
>>>With him holding power, I fear him.
>>>No ablative absolute because "him" is the object of "timeo."
>>>Dr Schaufele is a professional linguist; I am not. But to me, only
>>>the examples at Bartleby's are absolute constructions. The examples
>>>given by Dr. Schaufele are simply participial phrases.
Thanks for the affirmation. I googled for "absolute constructions"
and found those two references. For the latter I said to
myself, "Those are participial expressions."
David Crystal, in his "A Dictionary of Linguistics of Phonetics,"
says, "English displays an absolute use of adverbs and adjectives in
sentence-initial position," and gives the following as examples in
English:
However, he arrived later.
Happy, she went to sleep.
I can see "however" as modifying the clause, but it looks to me
like "happy" simply modifies "she" and thus would not qualify as an
absolute construction. We don't normally modify pronouns with
adjectives. Intonation would show a difference. But I see this as a
transformation of "The happy girl went to sleep."
Charlie
http://wiki.frath.net/user:caeruleancentaur