Re: Tense formations

On Saturday 15 September 2001 09:13, you wrote:
> Kou eskrë »
>
> > James wrote:
> > >(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?
>
> OK, so I got perfect and imperfect round the wrong way. Maybe. :-\
>
> > 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).
>
> I don't believe that that distinction exists in Norwegian - «elsket» would
> I think be used in both situations. But I'm just a beginner, so maybe Tal
> or our new member Rune (velkommen!) could provide native-speaker
> clarification.
>
Thanks! That sounds right to me, although you'd probably be better off
asking someone who actually knows what a supine is...

-------------
Rune Haugseng

Reply