Re: Tense formations

James wrote:

>I'm documenting Jameld's grammar, and I could do with your help,
>terminology-wise.
>
>But there's still something I always think of as a past participle; maybe
>it's more of a verbal adjective. Help, I need technical terms! Compare:
>
>(strong)
>I have given it       me yibave iet
>It was given by me    et wä yeban ük ime
>
>(weak)
>I have loved her      me liubave ies
>She was loved by me   es wä liubi ük ime
>
>What are "yeban" and "liubi" here?
James, aren't you, like, Joe Norwegian Dude? It seems to me in my
informal study of Swedish that there are four principal parts there
(vs. the German and English three):
present-past-pastparticiple-supine. I don't remember which is which,
but say for the word "älska", "love", the pp. and the supine are
"älskat" and "älskad" (also don't quite remember the difference in
usage). Native speakers can clear up the confusion, but I would've
imagined that the other Scandinavian tongues had similar features. My
OED gives the definition of "supine" as "a Latin verbal noun...", but
I think there's a slight shift in meaning when it comes to
Scandinavia, and perhaps that's the term you're looking for?

Free forming,
I am

Kou

Replies