Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

169931Re: Adverbial verbs(like stative verbs)?

Expand Messages
  • R A Brown
    Feb 1, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Garth Wallace wrote:
      > On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 10:27 PM, David Peterson <dedalvs@...> wrote:
      >> Don't need adverbs?! Please! For a language, you don't need
      >> anything *but* adverbs!
      >> (Cue "here comes the relevant link" music...)
      >> http://specgram.com/CLII.g/02.gladstone.shigudo.html
      >> I didn't write this one, but it's a lot of fun!
      > Ha! Brilliant!

      Yes, it is, isn't it!

      But to return to the matter of someone who wishes to eschew
      adverbs (and much else besides) and have only nouns and

      Philip Newton wrote:
      > That works well for adverbs that are related to
      adjectives ("in an ADJ
      > manner", for example). But "adverb", at least in some
      descriptions of
      > some languages, is also a catch-all class for all sorts
      of particles
      > such as "tomorrow" and "there".

      Yep - practically all the discussion so far has related to
      what we, back in the 1950s, called "adverbs of manner" and,
      indeed, solely to descriptive adjectives; and as it has been
      pointed out, there is no real problem in dispensing with the
      category "adverb [of manner]." Many natlangs don't have a
      discrete category for them.

      'Tomorrow' may, of course, be used as a noun, so presumably
      this can have some noun flexion. But 'there' ("adverb of
      place") and 'then' ("adverb of time") seem to me a little

      When I saw Philip's 'there', my immediate response was "[in]
      that place." Then I thought "Hey, how's Vincent going to
      express 'that'? It's adjectival, but a stative verb doesn't
      seem appropriate."

      Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
      There's none too old to learn.
    • Show all 20 messages in this topic