Re: TAKE 2nd verb page updatedc

On 11/3/07, Andreas Johansson <andjo@...> wrote:
> Quoting Benct Philip Jonsson <conlang@...>:
>
> > On 2007-11-02 Philip Newton wrote:
> >  > On 11/1/07, Henrik Theiling <theiling@...> wrote:
> >  > > > Exactly like German: die Ochsen, die Du namst
> >  > [snip]
> >  > > >   an den Ort, den (der) Gott Dir gab
> >  >
> >  > Funny how I've never thought about that -- that is, the
> >  > fact that "die" and "den" look exactly like the
> >  > appropriate form of the definite article.
> >  >
> >  > Yet for me as a native speaker, they feel like completely
> >  > different words -- I interpret them as relative pronouns,
> >  > not as definite articles, even though they look and sound
> >  > completely the same.
> >  >
> >  > Fascinating stuff, this language business.
> >  >
> >  > So, very plausible for TAKE.
> >  >
> >
> > One wonders if that is because you're also a native speaker
> > of another language where the article, demonstrative and
> > relative are clearly distinguished. I that can influence
> > one's judgment. For me who -- ahem -- used to be a native
> > speaker of German they are clearly the same, and I may be
> > influenced by the fact that in Swedish the relativizer is
> > the indeclinable particle _som_. I think few native speakers
> > who were not influenced by grammatical theory influenced by
> > other languages even think of it as a pronoun.
>
> Do people not influenced by grammatical theory think of *anything* as a pronoun?
That's more or less what I was going to say.

I don't think of it as a pronoun -- I don't give it a name at all. It
just "feels like a different word".

Even in nearly minimal pairs, such as (to make something up off the
top of my head) "Unser nächster Spracher ist der Mann, der sieht"
(rel.pron.) vs. "Unser nächster Sprecher ist der Mann, der Sehende"
(article).

Cheers,
--
Philip Newton <philip.newton@...>