USAGE: 'born'

From: "Nik Taylor" <fortytwo@...>
> Muke Tever wrote:
> > ['Born' as a verb isn't helpful either, because it hasn't got a useful
passive.]
>
> But, what the child does would be a passive verb, and thus would not
> *need* a passive.
Sapir-Whorf cries!

I asked if there was an active (i.e., not passive) English verb meaning 'to be
born' because I couldn't think of one, and wanted a shorter, more usable gloss
for the Hadwan verb <shinits> which has that meaning (which *does* exist in both
passive and active) than "come into being".  The passive of such a verb would
not be unnecessary at all--the passive for "the child was born [shinirits]
(through the mother)" might mean something along the lines of "the child was
brought into being [shiniritsur] (by the mother)" .

There's no reason why such a verb shouldn't exist.  In fact, I know they already
do; both Latin and Greek have cognate verbs that appear to be used exactly that
way in <nascor> and <gignomai>.  In modern Spanish the verb is <nacer>, and my
Spanish-French dictionary says the French is <naître>.  As far as I know none of
these verbs are inherently passive.

Again I am reminded of bits of the 'sales pitch' for Láadan.  :)  ["English has
no word whatsoever for what a woman does during intercourse" mutates into "...no
word whatsoever for what a baby does during childbirth..."]

> What's the passive of "die"?  :-)
There isn't a proper one in English.  But I know the passive form <morirse> of
<morir> is perfectly allowable in Spanish.


    *Muke!

Reply