Re: coexisting case question

René Uittenbogaard wrote:
[snip]

> Now my question is: would it be very unlikely for a language to use
> this "reverse genitive" case only for quantities, and the usual
> genitive otherwise, so that the following constructs coexisted:
>
> For "usual" genitives:
> I-NOM hold book-ACC lady-GEN.
> I am holding a book of the lady.
>
> But for quantities:
> I-NOM hold glass-REVGEN wine-ACC.
> I am holding a glass of wine.
It would be quite normal to use one construction for quantities and a
quite different one for 'possessive genitive'. Many languages do this.
For example in Welsh:

POSSESSIVE: llyfr y ferch
             book the lady = the lady's book

PARTITIVE:  gwydraid o wyn
             glass(ful) of wine

> We might even label this last example as "quantitative case".
> What's in a name, but it looks a lot more plausible like this :)
>
> I-NOM hold glass-QUANT wine-ACC.
> I am holding a glass of wine.
..and if we consider "I am drinking a glass of wine" it is even more
plausible, as it is surely the wine I am drinking and not the cup. i.e.
the wine is logically the object.

This seems to me eminently plausible and I would be surprised if
constructions like this were _not_ found in some natlangs.

In short, using different constructions for 'possessive genitive' and
for partitives are not uncommon; so, yes, they can and do coexist in
many natlangs.

The sort of construction you suggest for quantities seem to me quite
plausible (and I'm sure is found).

--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
Frustra fit per plura quod potest
fieri per pauciora.
[William of Ockham]