Chris Bates wrote:
> Eddy Ohlms wrote:
> But what I am saying is, if their form is always the same, why is it any
> more correct to analyse them as verb inflections than as separate words?
> I could consider la and ma as pronouns which doesn't necessarily
> preclude having the subject and object included in the sentence, like below
>
> a Juan le gusta el cine
>
> spanish grammars analyse le as a separate pronoun and not an inflection
> but "a Juan" and "le" in this sentence refer to exactly the same thing
> so why include both? If you try skipping the le though its wrong. I'm
> just pointing out that the fact an argument is mentioned explicitly is
> no reason that a language can't require a pronoun as well. There are
> languages with separate tense /aspect markers as well that I believe in
> some languages have to occur in certain positions in the sentence... so
> as far as I can see if the morphemes don't fuse or merge in any way or
> influence each other then still the only thing stopping me analysing
> them as separate words is stress.
Here's a better example:
Kûfstaf/îma.
Kû-fsta-f/î-ma.
habitual-quickly-walk-1SSA
I walk quickly often.
But it certainly isn't pronounced as Kû fsta f/î ma.