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

hald/ald/salt/wald vs hold/old/solt/wold

Expand Messages
  • David Parke
    Question of phonlogical evolution. I firmly think that FS should represent an evolution from the prototype according to the commonest or most typical
    Message 1 of 23 , Feb 20 5:48 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Question of phonlogical evolution. I firmly think that FS should
      represent an evolution from the prototype according to the commonest
      or most typical evolutionary patterns.

      Up to now I have use ald/t in these words.
      But looking at the source languages, a more majority evolution would
      seem to be for *a before *ld and *lt to become o.

      eg
      EN hold
      NL houden
      DA holde
      NO holde
      SV hålle

      versus

      DE halten

      What say you(all)?
    • chamavian
      I ve always used holde etc and I think FS should have this form, for the reason you mentioned: three quarter of the source languages has it
      Message 2 of 23 , Feb 20 10:45 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        I've always used "holde" etc and I think FS should have this form,
        for the reason you mentioned: three quarter of the source languages
        has it

        --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "David Parke" <parked@...> wrote:
        >
        > Question of phonlogical evolution. I firmly think that FS should
        > represent an evolution from the prototype according to the commonest
        > or most typical evolutionary patterns.
        >
        > Up to now I have use ald/t in these words.
        > But looking at the source languages, a more majority evolution would
        > seem to be for *a before *ld and *lt to become o.
        >
        > eg
        > EN hold
        > NL houden
        > DA holde
        > NO holde
        > SV hålle
        >
        > versus
        >
        > DE halten
        >
        > What say you(all)?
        >
      • stefichjo
        Agreed. I add Hu old is du? and Hu old er Ji? to the consensus corner then. Stephan
        Message 3 of 23 , Feb 21 2:58 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Agreed.

          I add "Hu old is du?" and "Hu old er Ji?" to the consensus corner then.

          Stephan

          --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "chamavian" <roerd096@...> wrote:
          >
          > I've always used "holde" etc and I think FS should have this form,
          > for the reason you mentioned: three quarter of the source languages
          > has it
          >
          > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "David Parke" <parked@> wrote:
          > >
          > > Question of phonlogical evolution. I firmly think that FS should
          > > represent an evolution from the prototype according to the commonest
          > > or most typical evolutionary patterns.
          > >
          > > Up to now I have use ald/t in these words.
          > > But looking at the source languages, a more majority evolution would
          > > seem to be for *a before *ld and *lt to become o.
          > >
          > > eg
          > > EN hold
          > > NL houden
          > > DA holde
          > > NO holde
          > > SV hålle
          > >
          > > versus
          > >
          > > DE halten
          > >
          > > What say you(all)?
          > >
          >
        • clayton_rc
          ... Is there any objection to Hu old er du ? Clayton
          Message 4 of 23 , Feb 22 5:02 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@...> wrote:
            >
            > Agreed.
            >
            > I add "Hu old is du?" and "Hu old er Ji?" to the consensus corner then.
            >
            > Stephan
            >
            Is there any objection to "Hu old er du"?

            Clayton
          • chamavian
            ... then. ... Yes, there IS. I want is for singular, er for plural, because in that case both West Germanic (German, English, Dutch) is(t), and Anglo-
            Message 5 of 23 , Feb 22 10:24 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "clayton_rc" <entrelenga@...> wrote:
              >
              > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
              > >
              > > Agreed.
              > >
              > > I add "Hu old is du?" and "Hu old er Ji?" to the consensus corner
              then.
              > >
              > > Stephan
              > >
              > Is there any objection to "Hu old er du"?
              >
              > Clayton


              Yes, there IS. I want "is" for singular, "er" for plural, because in
              that case both West Germanic (German, English, Dutch) is(t), and Anglo-
              Scandinavian er/are/är is represented in FS.
            • clayton_rc
              ... I have no objections to hi is , si is , et is , dat is and so on. But I find du is and ik is kaum begreiflich. Clayton
              Message 6 of 23 , Feb 23 4:52 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "chamavian" <roerd096@...> wrote:
                >
                >
                >
                > Yes, there IS. I want "is" for singular, "er" for plural, because in
                > that case both West Germanic (German, English, Dutch) is(t), and Anglo-
                > Scandinavian er/are/är is represented in FS.
                >

                I have no objections to "hi is", "si is", "et is", "dat is" and so on.
                But I find "du is" and "ik is" kaum begreiflich.

                Clayton
              • stefichjo
                If hi is is ok for you, what should be the ik and du forms? ik bin , du bist ? ;-) Stephan ... Anglo-
                Message 7 of 23 , Feb 23 11:25 AM
                • 0 Attachment
                  If "hi is" is ok for you, what should be the "ik" and "du" forms?

                  "ik bin", "du bist"? ;-)

                  Stephan

                  --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "clayton_rc" <entrelenga@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "chamavian" <roerd096@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Yes, there IS. I want "is" for singular, "er" for plural, because in
                  > > that case both West Germanic (German, English, Dutch) is(t), and
                  Anglo-
                  > > Scandinavian er/are/är is represented in FS.
                  > >
                  >
                  > I have no objections to "hi is", "si is", "et is", "dat is" and so on.
                  > But I find "du is" and "ik is" kaum begreiflich.
                  >
                  > Clayton
                  >
                • David Parke
                  For some people, even having 2 forms for this verb is too complicated. But if we had even more conjugations for this verb, why no conjugate the rest of the
                  Message 8 of 23 , Feb 23 12:57 PM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    For some people, even having 2 forms for this verb is too complicated.
                    But if we had even more conjugations for this verb, why no conjugate the
                    rest of the verbs fully? For example have all 2nd person singular verbs
                    ending in -est? And all 3rd person singular verbs ending in -eth? Nay,
                    that's all getting a bit too far away from the idea of simplicity.
                    I think having 2 conjugations for verbs is the maximum that we should
                    have in FS, although even this is more complex than necessary. Having 2
                    conjugations (for example distinguishing between singular and plural),
                    provides just a little bit of stimulation to the brain which will
                    prepare FS students for the complexity of natural germanic language.
                    Much is made of the Scandinavian verb conjugations and how simple they
                    are. I have read claims that they have have only a single conjugation.
                    For example jeg kommer, vi kommer, du kommer, han kommer, det kommer,
                    hun kommer, de kommer.
                    What these claimants forget is that the finite verb in scandinavian is
                    different from the infinitive, so that means there are in fact 2
                    conjugations, finite versus infinitive. In some other germanic
                    languages, certain conjugations are the same as the infinitve. For
                    example German with wir kommen, Sie kommen.
                    Probably the minimum number of conjugations in the germanic languages
                    would be 2. For "normal verbs" in English, there is an infinitive form
                    also used for all conjugations except 3rd person singular. 3rd person
                    singular verbs take the -s conjugation. So 2 conjugations in
                    English(unless we count the obsolete 2nd person singualar -est
                    conjugation) . In continental scandy, all numbers and persons of finite
                    verbs take -er/-ar and the infinitive verbs end in -e/-a. So 2
                    conjugations again.

                    So having 2 conjugations for FS verbs would be no more complex than the
                    simplest of the natural germanic languages. Whereas it is still more
                    complex than strictly necessary, it would provide a little bit of
                    Germanic flavouring and provide some prepartion for the complexity of
                    natural Germanic languages.

                    So I would propose:
                    FS verbs have an infinitive form ending in -e. This is also the finite
                    form for plural verbs. Then they have a finite form for singular verbs.
                    This singular form has no suffix and uses just the raw verb stem. It
                    also makes some of the irregular verbs (such as wese and some auxiliary)
                    able to be irregular and still fit into the overall conjugational
                    pattern. This would be because we could have irregular verbs with
                    singular forms (such as "wese" has "is", "meuge has "mag") and the
                    singular forms could have no suffix. The plural forms (such as "wese"
                    has "ere", "meuge" has "meuge") could keep the -e suffix.


                    stefichjo wrote:

                    >If "hi is" is ok for you, what should be the "ik" and "du" forms?
                    >
                    >"ik bin", "du bist"? ;-)
                    >
                    >Stephan
                    >
                    >--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "clayton_rc" <entrelenga@...> wrote:
                    >
                    >
                    >>--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "chamavian" <roerd096@> wrote:
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>>
                    >>>Yes, there IS. I want "is" for singular, "er" for plural, because in
                    >>>that case both West Germanic (German, English, Dutch) is(t), and
                    >>>
                    >>>
                    >Anglo-
                    >
                    >
                    >>>Scandinavian er/are/är is represented in FS.
                    >>>
                    >>>
                    >>>
                    >>I have no objections to "hi is", "si is", "et is", "dat is" and so on.
                    >>But I find "du is" and "ik is" kaum begreiflich.
                    >>
                    >>Clayton
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    >
                    >No virus found in this incoming message.
                    >Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                    >Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/698 - Release Date: 23/02/2007 4:39 a.m.
                    >
                    >
                  • stefichjo
                    ... David, we have alread discussed this. It is consensus that present tense verbs do not have any suffix. We have discussed and agreed that the infinitive
                    Message 9 of 23 , Feb 23 3:08 PM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@...> wrote:
                      > So I would propose:

                      David, we have alread discussed this. It is consensus that present
                      tense verbs do not have any suffix.

                      We have discussed and agreed that the infinitive should have the
                      suffix "-e".

                      I have proposed that the subjunctive present tense should have the
                      suffix "-e", what about that?

                      EN "he insisted that you be present" (I hope this sentence is correct)
                      FS "hi insistered dat du wes_e_ dar"

                      Stephan
                    • stefichjo
                      In other words: So yes, we have two conjugations: indicative and subjunctive. The subjunctive form is used in order to have the form that we call infinitive .
                      Message 10 of 23 , Feb 23 3:16 PM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        In other words: So yes, we have two conjugations: indicative and
                        subjunctive. The subjunctive form is used in order to have the form
                        that we call "infinitive".

                        from:
                        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinitive
                        Huddleston and Pullum's recent Cambridge Grammar of the English
                        Language (CGEL) does not use the notion of the infinitive, arguing
                        that English uses the same form of the verb, the plain form, in
                        infinitival clauses that it uses in imperative and present-subjunctive
                        clauses.

                        Stephan

                        --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@> wrote:
                        > > So I would propose:
                        >
                        > David, we have alread discussed this. It is consensus that present
                        > tense verbs do not have any suffix.
                        >
                        > We have discussed and agreed that the infinitive should have the
                        > suffix "-e".
                        >
                        > I have proposed that the subjunctive present tense should have the
                        > suffix "-e", what about that?
                        >
                        > EN "he insisted that you be present" (I hope this sentence is correct)
                        > FS "hi insistered dat du wes_e_ dar"
                        >
                        > Stephan
                        >
                      • stefichjo
                        And one more thing: Latin does the same trick: the infinitive, e. g. amare (EN to love ) is a subjunctive form. The subjunctive (_past_) tense of this verb
                        Message 11 of 23 , Feb 23 3:18 PM
                        • 0 Attachment
                          And one more thing:

                          Latin does the same trick: the infinitive, e. g. "amare" (EN "to
                          love") is a subjunctive form. The subjunctive (_past_) tense of this
                          verb is:

                          amarem
                          amares
                          amaret
                          amaremus
                          amaretis
                          amarent

                          if I'm not mistaken.

                          Stephan



                          --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > In other words: So yes, we have two conjugations: indicative and
                          > subjunctive. The subjunctive form is used in order to have the form
                          > that we call "infinitive".
                          >
                          > from:
                          > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinitive
                          > Huddleston and Pullum's recent Cambridge Grammar of the English
                          > Language (CGEL) does not use the notion of the infinitive, arguing
                          > that English uses the same form of the verb, the plain form, in
                          > infinitival clauses that it uses in imperative and present-subjunctive
                          > clauses.
                          >
                          > Stephan
                          >
                          > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                          > >
                          > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@> wrote:
                          > > > So I would propose:
                          > >
                          > > David, we have alread discussed this. It is consensus that present
                          > > tense verbs do not have any suffix.
                          > >
                          > > We have discussed and agreed that the infinitive should have the
                          > > suffix "-e".
                          > >
                          > > I have proposed that the subjunctive present tense should have the
                          > > suffix "-e", what about that?
                          > >
                          > > EN "he insisted that you be present" (I hope this sentence is correct)
                          > > FS "hi insistered dat du wes_e_ dar"
                          > >
                          > > Stephan
                          > >
                          >
                        • chamavian
                          Subjunctive is unknown in at least English, Dutch and Scandinavian, therefor I don t think it can have a place in FS ... subjunctive ... correct)
                          Message 12 of 23 , Feb 23 3:23 PM
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Subjunctive is unknown in at least English, Dutch and Scandinavian,
                            therefor I don't think it can have a place in FS

                            --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > In other words: So yes, we have two conjugations: indicative and
                            > subjunctive. The subjunctive form is used in order to have the form
                            > that we call "infinitive".
                            >
                            > from:
                            > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinitive
                            > Huddleston and Pullum's recent Cambridge Grammar of the English
                            > Language (CGEL) does not use the notion of the infinitive, arguing
                            > that English uses the same form of the verb, the plain form, in
                            > infinitival clauses that it uses in imperative and present-
                            subjunctive
                            > clauses.
                            >
                            > Stephan
                            >
                            > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                            > >
                            > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@> wrote:
                            > > > So I would propose:
                            > >
                            > > David, we have alread discussed this. It is consensus that present
                            > > tense verbs do not have any suffix.
                            > >
                            > > We have discussed and agreed that the infinitive should have the
                            > > suffix "-e".
                            > >
                            > > I have proposed that the subjunctive present tense should have the
                            > > suffix "-e", what about that?
                            > >
                            > > EN "he insisted that you be present" (I hope this sentence is
                            correct)
                            > > FS "hi insistered dat du wes_e_ dar"
                            > >
                            > > Stephan
                            > >
                            >
                          • stefichjo
                            I would rather have er for _all_ present tense forms. ik er du er hi er wi er ji er dee er Scandy and simple. Bye, Stephan ... correct)
                            Message 13 of 23 , Feb 23 3:31 PM
                            • 0 Attachment
                              I would rather have "er" for _all_ present tense forms.

                              ik er
                              du er
                              hi er
                              wi er
                              ji er
                              dee er

                              Scandy and simple.

                              Bye,
                              Stephan

                              --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > And one more thing:
                              >
                              > Latin does the same trick: the infinitive, e. g. "amare" (EN "to
                              > love") is a subjunctive form. The subjunctive (_past_) tense of this
                              > verb is:
                              >
                              > amarem
                              > amares
                              > amaret
                              > amaremus
                              > amaretis
                              > amarent
                              >
                              > if I'm not mistaken.
                              >
                              > Stephan
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                              > >
                              > > In other words: So yes, we have two conjugations: indicative and
                              > > subjunctive. The subjunctive form is used in order to have the form
                              > > that we call "infinitive".
                              > >
                              > > from:
                              > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinitive
                              > > Huddleston and Pullum's recent Cambridge Grammar of the English
                              > > Language (CGEL) does not use the notion of the infinitive, arguing
                              > > that English uses the same form of the verb, the plain form, in
                              > > infinitival clauses that it uses in imperative and present-subjunctive
                              > > clauses.
                              > >
                              > > Stephan
                              > >
                              > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                              > > >
                              > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@> wrote:
                              > > > > So I would propose:
                              > > >
                              > > > David, we have alread discussed this. It is consensus that present
                              > > > tense verbs do not have any suffix.
                              > > >
                              > > > We have discussed and agreed that the infinitive should have the
                              > > > suffix "-e".
                              > > >
                              > > > I have proposed that the subjunctive present tense should have the
                              > > > suffix "-e", what about that?
                              > > >
                              > > > EN "he insisted that you be present" (I hope this sentence is
                              correct)
                              > > > FS "hi insistered dat du wes_e_ dar"
                              > > >
                              > > > Stephan
                              > > >
                              > >
                              >
                            • stefichjo
                              I don t insist on using the subjunctive. FS hi insistered dat du wese dar - hi hinsistered dat du is dar EN hi/she insisted that you be there I also don t
                              Message 14 of 23 , Feb 23 4:25 PM
                              • 0 Attachment
                                I don't insist on using the subjunctive.

                                FS hi insistered dat du wese dar -> hi hinsistered dat du is dar
                                EN hi/she insisted that you be there

                                I also don't insist on using the middle voice suffix -s. (passive
                                suffixe -s.)

                                FS de windog breks -> de windog brek
                                EN the window breaks


                                Let's keep it simple. Neither "-e" nor "-s". :-)

                                Stephan



                                --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "chamavian" <roerd096@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > Subjunctive is unknown in at least English, Dutch and Scandinavian,
                                > therefor I don't think it can have a place in FS
                                >
                                > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                > >
                                > > In other words: So yes, we have two conjugations: indicative and
                                > > subjunctive. The subjunctive form is used in order to have the form
                                > > that we call "infinitive".
                                > >
                                > > from:
                                > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinitive
                                > > Huddleston and Pullum's recent Cambridge Grammar of the English
                                > > Language (CGEL) does not use the notion of the infinitive, arguing
                                > > that English uses the same form of the verb, the plain form, in
                                > > infinitival clauses that it uses in imperative and present-
                                > subjunctive
                                > > clauses.
                                > >
                                > > Stephan
                                > >
                                > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                > > >
                                > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@> wrote:
                                > > > > So I would propose:
                                > > >
                                > > > David, we have alread discussed this. It is consensus that present
                                > > > tense verbs do not have any suffix.
                                > > >
                                > > > We have discussed and agreed that the infinitive should have the
                                > > > suffix "-e".
                                > > >
                                > > > I have proposed that the subjunctive present tense should have the
                                > > > suffix "-e", what about that?
                                > > >
                                > > > EN "he insisted that you be present" (I hope this sentence is
                                > correct)
                                > > > FS "hi insistered dat du wes_e_ dar"
                                > > >
                                > > > Stephan
                                > > >
                                > >
                                >
                              • stefichjo
                                BTW, how come you say it is _unknown_ in _English_? Is Wikipedia wrong? Stephan
                                Message 15 of 23 , Feb 23 4:26 PM
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  BTW, how come you say it is _unknown_ in _English_? Is Wikipedia wrong?

                                  Stephan

                                  --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "chamavian" <roerd096@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > Subjunctive is unknown in at least English, Dutch and Scandinavian,
                                  > therefor I don't think it can have a place in FS
                                  >
                                  > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                  > >
                                  > > In other words: So yes, we have two conjugations: indicative and
                                  > > subjunctive. The subjunctive form is used in order to have the form
                                  > > that we call "infinitive".
                                  > >
                                  > > from:
                                  > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinitive
                                  > > Huddleston and Pullum's recent Cambridge Grammar of the English
                                  > > Language (CGEL) does not use the notion of the infinitive, arguing
                                  > > that English uses the same form of the verb, the plain form, in
                                  > > infinitival clauses that it uses in imperative and present-
                                  > subjunctive
                                  > > clauses.
                                  > >
                                  > > Stephan
                                  > >
                                  > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                  > > >
                                  > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@> wrote:
                                  > > > > So I would propose:
                                  > > >
                                  > > > David, we have alread discussed this. It is consensus that present
                                  > > > tense verbs do not have any suffix.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > We have discussed and agreed that the infinitive should have the
                                  > > > suffix "-e".
                                  > > >
                                  > > > I have proposed that the subjunctive present tense should have the
                                  > > > suffix "-e", what about that?
                                  > > >
                                  > > > EN "he insisted that you be present" (I hope this sentence is
                                  > correct)
                                  > > > FS "hi insistered dat du wes_e_ dar"
                                  > > >
                                  > > > Stephan
                                  > > >
                                  > >
                                  >
                                • stefichjo
                                  Another article about the subjunctive in English. It doesn t hurt. ;-) http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxsubjun.html As you can see, English does know
                                  Message 16 of 23 , Feb 25 5:01 AM
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Another article about the subjunctive in English. It doesn't hurt. ;-)

                                    http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxsubjun.html



                                    As you can see, English does know subjunctive, both for the present
                                    and for the past. Also German does.

                                    Famous sentence with present subjunctive
                                    EN Thy kingdom _come_ (not "comes")
                                    DE Dein Reich _komme_ (not "kommt")
                                    FS _Kome_ din rik / Din rik _kome_ (not "kom")


                                    We could have a basic register as well, of course, which could be just
                                    to ignore the possibility of using the subjunctive, or to use an
                                    auxilary verb like "should".

                                    Any suggestions?

                                    My preference for a subjunctive in FS is to use the infinitive (even
                                    though, one might say that the form of the infinitive is taken from
                                    the subjunctive form, which is more acurate).

                                    EN suffice it to say
                                    DE meuge it rike to segge
                                    DE rike it to segge

                                    Stephan


                                    --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > BTW, how come you say it is _unknown_ in _English_? Is Wikipedia wrong?
                                    >
                                    > Stephan
                                    >
                                    > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "chamavian" <roerd096@> wrote:
                                    > >
                                    > > Subjunctive is unknown in at least English, Dutch and Scandinavian,
                                    > > therefor I don't think it can have a place in FS
                                    > >
                                    > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                    > > >
                                    > > > In other words: So yes, we have two conjugations: indicative and
                                    > > > subjunctive. The subjunctive form is used in order to have the form
                                    > > > that we call "infinitive".
                                    > > >
                                    > > > from:
                                    > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinitive
                                    > > > Huddleston and Pullum's recent Cambridge Grammar of the English
                                    > > > Language (CGEL) does not use the notion of the infinitive, arguing
                                    > > > that English uses the same form of the verb, the plain form, in
                                    > > > infinitival clauses that it uses in imperative and present-
                                    > > subjunctive
                                    > > > clauses.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > Stephan
                                    > > >
                                    > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@> wrote:
                                    > > > > > So I would propose:
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > David, we have alread discussed this. It is consensus that present
                                    > > > > tense verbs do not have any suffix.
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > We have discussed and agreed that the infinitive should have the
                                    > > > > suffix "-e".
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > I have proposed that the subjunctive present tense should have the
                                    > > > > suffix "-e", what about that?
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > EN "he insisted that you be present" (I hope this sentence is
                                    > > correct)
                                    > > > > FS "hi insistered dat du wes_e_ dar"
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > Stephan
                                    > > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > >
                                    >
                                  • stefichjo
                                    My preference was about FS, not about DE in fact, sorry for the typo. David and Ingmar, How do you feel about reaching a consensus on verb forms? I feel it s
                                    Message 17 of 23 , Feb 25 5:47 AM
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      My preference was about FS, not about DE in fact, sorry for the typo.


                                      David and Ingmar,
                                      How do you feel about reaching a consensus on verb forms? I feel it's
                                      proceding very slowly. :-/

                                      Verb issues are:
                                      - subjunctive = infinitive ?
                                      - suffix "-e" obsolete ? (gae vs. ga' vs. ga)
                                      - trennbare verben ? (forgeve vs. geve for)
                                      - unstressed suffixes with "-e-" ? (endschuldige vs. ondschuldige)


                                      My preferences:
                                      - subjuntive = infinitive: _yes_ (meuge it rike to segge)
                                      - suffix "-e" obsolete: (_gae_ = not obsolete)
                                      - trennbare verben: (_geve for_)
                                      - unstressed suffixes with "-e-": (endschuldige)


                                      Stephan



                                      --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > Another article about the subjunctive in English. It doesn't hurt. ;-)
                                      >
                                      > http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxsubjun.html
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > As you can see, English does know subjunctive, both for the present
                                      > and for the past. Also German does.
                                      >
                                      > Famous sentence with present subjunctive
                                      > EN Thy kingdom _come_ (not "comes")
                                      > DE Dein Reich _komme_ (not "kommt")
                                      > FS _Kome_ din rik / Din rik _kome_ (not "kom")
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > We could have a basic register as well, of course, which could be just
                                      > to ignore the possibility of using the subjunctive, or to use an
                                      > auxilary verb like "should".
                                      >
                                      > Any suggestions?
                                      >
                                      > My preference for a subjunctive in FS is to use the infinitive (even
                                      > though, one might say that the form of the infinitive is taken from
                                      > the subjunctive form, which is more acurate).
                                      >
                                      > EN suffice it to say
                                      > DE meuge it rike to segge
                                      > DE rike it to segge
                                      >
                                      > Stephan
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                      > >
                                      > > BTW, how come you say it is _unknown_ in _English_? Is Wikipedia
                                      wrong?
                                      > >
                                      > > Stephan
                                      > >
                                      > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "chamavian" <roerd096@> wrote:
                                      > > >
                                      > > > Subjunctive is unknown in at least English, Dutch and Scandinavian,
                                      > > > therefor I don't think it can have a place in FS
                                      > > >
                                      > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > In other words: So yes, we have two conjugations: indicative and
                                      > > > > subjunctive. The subjunctive form is used in order to have the
                                      form
                                      > > > > that we call "infinitive".
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > from:
                                      > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinitive
                                      > > > > Huddleston and Pullum's recent Cambridge Grammar of the English
                                      > > > > Language (CGEL) does not use the notion of the infinitive, arguing
                                      > > > > that English uses the same form of the verb, the plain form, in
                                      > > > > infinitival clauses that it uses in imperative and present-
                                      > > > subjunctive
                                      > > > > clauses.
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > Stephan
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                      > > > > >
                                      > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@> wrote:
                                      > > > > > > So I would propose:
                                      > > > > >
                                      > > > > > David, we have alread discussed this. It is consensus that
                                      present
                                      > > > > > tense verbs do not have any suffix.
                                      > > > > >
                                      > > > > > We have discussed and agreed that the infinitive should have the
                                      > > > > > suffix "-e".
                                      > > > > >
                                      > > > > > I have proposed that the subjunctive present tense should
                                      have the
                                      > > > > > suffix "-e", what about that?
                                      > > > > >
                                      > > > > > EN "he insisted that you be present" (I hope this sentence is
                                      > > > correct)
                                      > > > > > FS "hi insistered dat du wes_e_ dar"
                                      > > > > >
                                      > > > > > Stephan
                                      > > > > >
                                      > > > >
                                      > > >
                                      > >
                                      >
                                    • chamavian
                                      I absolutely don t want a subjunctive. ... typo. ... it s ... hurt. ;-) ... present ... just ... (even ... from ... Scandinavian, ... indicative and ... the
                                      Message 18 of 23 , Feb 25 9:48 AM
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        I absolutely don't want a subjunctive.

                                        --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        > My preference was about FS, not about DE in fact, sorry for the
                                        typo.
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > David and Ingmar,
                                        > How do you feel about reaching a consensus on verb forms? I feel
                                        it's
                                        > proceding very slowly. :-/
                                        >
                                        > Verb issues are:
                                        > - subjunctive = infinitive ?
                                        > - suffix "-e" obsolete ? (gae vs. ga' vs. ga)
                                        > - trennbare verben ? (forgeve vs. geve for)
                                        > - unstressed suffixes with "-e-" ? (endschuldige vs. ondschuldige)
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > My preferences:
                                        > - subjuntive = infinitive: _yes_ (meuge it rike to segge)
                                        > - suffix "-e" obsolete: (_gae_ = not obsolete)
                                        > - trennbare verben: (_geve for_)
                                        > - unstressed suffixes with "-e-": (endschuldige)
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > Stephan
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                        > >
                                        > > Another article about the subjunctive in English. It doesn't
                                        hurt. ;-)
                                        > >
                                        > > http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxsubjun.html
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        > > As you can see, English does know subjunctive, both for the
                                        present
                                        > > and for the past. Also German does.
                                        > >
                                        > > Famous sentence with present subjunctive
                                        > > EN Thy kingdom _come_ (not "comes")
                                        > > DE Dein Reich _komme_ (not "kommt")
                                        > > FS _Kome_ din rik / Din rik _kome_ (not "kom")
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        > > We could have a basic register as well, of course, which could be
                                        just
                                        > > to ignore the possibility of using the subjunctive, or to use an
                                        > > auxilary verb like "should".
                                        > >
                                        > > Any suggestions?
                                        > >
                                        > > My preference for a subjunctive in FS is to use the infinitive
                                        (even
                                        > > though, one might say that the form of the infinitive is taken
                                        from
                                        > > the subjunctive form, which is more acurate).
                                        > >
                                        > > EN suffice it to say
                                        > > DE meuge it rike to segge
                                        > > DE rike it to segge
                                        > >
                                        > > Stephan
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                        > > >
                                        > > > BTW, how come you say it is _unknown_ in _English_? Is Wikipedia
                                        > wrong?
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Stephan
                                        > > >
                                        > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "chamavian" <roerd096@>
                                        wrote:
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > Subjunctive is unknown in at least English, Dutch and
                                        Scandinavian,
                                        > > > > therefor I don't think it can have a place in FS
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > In other words: So yes, we have two conjugations:
                                        indicative and
                                        > > > > > subjunctive. The subjunctive form is used in order to have
                                        the
                                        > form
                                        > > > > > that we call "infinitive".
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > from:
                                        > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinitive
                                        > > > > > Huddleston and Pullum's recent Cambridge Grammar of the
                                        English
                                        > > > > > Language (CGEL) does not use the notion of the infinitive,
                                        arguing
                                        > > > > > that English uses the same form of the verb, the plain
                                        form, in
                                        > > > > > infinitival clauses that it uses in imperative and present-
                                        > > > > subjunctive
                                        > > > > > clauses.
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > Stephan
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@>
                                        wrote:
                                        > > > > > > > So I would propose:
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > David, we have alread discussed this. It is consensus that
                                        > present
                                        > > > > > > tense verbs do not have any suffix.
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > We have discussed and agreed that the infinitive should
                                        have the
                                        > > > > > > suffix "-e".
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > I have proposed that the subjunctive present tense should
                                        > have the
                                        > > > > > > suffix "-e", what about that?
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > EN "he insisted that you be present" (I hope this
                                        sentence is
                                        > > > > correct)
                                        > > > > > > FS "hi insistered dat du wes_e_ dar"
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > Stephan
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > >
                                        > > >
                                        > >
                                        >
                                      • stefichjo
                                        Nothing more to add? Stephan
                                        Message 19 of 23 , Feb 25 12:15 PM
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Nothing more to add?

                                          Stephan

                                          --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "chamavian" <roerd096@...> wrote:
                                          >
                                          > I absolutely don't want a subjunctive.
                                          >
                                          > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                          > >
                                          > > My preference was about FS, not about DE in fact, sorry for the
                                          > typo.
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > > David and Ingmar,
                                          > > How do you feel about reaching a consensus on verb forms? I feel
                                          > it's
                                          > > proceding very slowly. :-/
                                          > >
                                          > > Verb issues are:
                                          > > - subjunctive = infinitive ?
                                          > > - suffix "-e" obsolete ? (gae vs. ga' vs. ga)
                                          > > - trennbare verben ? (forgeve vs. geve for)
                                          > > - unstressed suffixes with "-e-" ? (endschuldige vs. ondschuldige)
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > > My preferences:
                                          > > - subjuntive = infinitive: _yes_ (meuge it rike to segge)
                                          > > - suffix "-e" obsolete: (_gae_ = not obsolete)
                                          > > - trennbare verben: (_geve for_)
                                          > > - unstressed suffixes with "-e-": (endschuldige)
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > > Stephan
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Another article about the subjunctive in English. It doesn't
                                          > hurt. ;-)
                                          > > >
                                          > > > http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxsubjun.html
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > > As you can see, English does know subjunctive, both for the
                                          > present
                                          > > > and for the past. Also German does.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Famous sentence with present subjunctive
                                          > > > EN Thy kingdom _come_ (not "comes")
                                          > > > DE Dein Reich _komme_ (not "kommt")
                                          > > > FS _Kome_ din rik / Din rik _kome_ (not "kom")
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > > We could have a basic register as well, of course, which could be
                                          > just
                                          > > > to ignore the possibility of using the subjunctive, or to use an
                                          > > > auxilary verb like "should".
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Any suggestions?
                                          > > >
                                          > > > My preference for a subjunctive in FS is to use the infinitive
                                          > (even
                                          > > > though, one might say that the form of the infinitive is taken
                                          > from
                                          > > > the subjunctive form, which is more acurate).
                                          > > >
                                          > > > EN suffice it to say
                                          > > > DE meuge it rike to segge
                                          > > > DE rike it to segge
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Stephan
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > BTW, how come you say it is _unknown_ in _English_? Is Wikipedia
                                          > > wrong?
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > Stephan
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "chamavian" <roerd096@>
                                          > wrote:
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > Subjunctive is unknown in at least English, Dutch and
                                          > Scandinavian,
                                          > > > > > therefor I don't think it can have a place in FS
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > In other words: So yes, we have two conjugations:
                                          > indicative and
                                          > > > > > > subjunctive. The subjunctive form is used in order to have
                                          > the
                                          > > form
                                          > > > > > > that we call "infinitive".
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > from:
                                          > > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinitive
                                          > > > > > > Huddleston and Pullum's recent Cambridge Grammar of the
                                          > English
                                          > > > > > > Language (CGEL) does not use the notion of the infinitive,
                                          > arguing
                                          > > > > > > that English uses the same form of the verb, the plain
                                          > form, in
                                          > > > > > > infinitival clauses that it uses in imperative and present-
                                          > > > > > subjunctive
                                          > > > > > > clauses.
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > Stephan
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                          > > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@>
                                          > wrote:
                                          > > > > > > > > So I would propose:
                                          > > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > > David, we have alread discussed this. It is consensus that
                                          > > present
                                          > > > > > > > tense verbs do not have any suffix.
                                          > > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > > We have discussed and agreed that the infinitive should
                                          > have the
                                          > > > > > > > suffix "-e".
                                          > > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > > I have proposed that the subjunctive present tense should
                                          > > have the
                                          > > > > > > > suffix "-e", what about that?
                                          > > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > > EN "he insisted that you be present" (I hope this
                                          > sentence is
                                          > > > > > correct)
                                          > > > > > > > FS "hi insistered dat du wes_e_ dar"
                                          > > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > > Stephan
                                          > > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > >
                                          >
                                        • Hugo Cesar de Castro Carneiro
                                          My preferences: For the subjunctive I want just like English, as the plural form of each time... Thy kingdom come (conjugated as in plural = we, they come) I
                                          Message 20 of 23 , Feb 26 6:12 AM
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            My preferences:
                                            For the subjunctive I want just like English, as the plural form of each
                                            time...
                                            Thy kingdom come (conjugated as in plural => we, they come)
                                            I wish I were a better person (conjugated as in plural => we, they were)
                                            But we should try to avoid using the final "-e", so it would be easierto
                                            have only one form to present in indicative or subjunctive and in singular
                                            or plural.

                                            I only think that the verb "wese" should have two forms, one singular and
                                            other plural because it is too anomalous. The same mechanic was used in
                                            Interlingua:
                                            io es
                                            tu es
                                            ille/illa/illo es
                                            nos son
                                            vos son
                                            illes/illas/illos son

                                            Suffix "-e" for infinitive: it should be used only when the stem of the verb
                                            is not ended ina vowel => "ga" (Better to read and it would be the form of:
                                            infinitive, imperative, indicative present and subjuntive present)

                                            Trennbar or not Trennbar: I prefer not using trennbar verbs, it is used only
                                            in dutch and german and it uses difficult mechanics, like throwing the
                                            prefix to the end of the clause. E.g.: "Gestern rief ich meine Mutter,
                                            meinen Vater, meine Schwester und meinen Bruder an."
                                            Or when one use some kinds of particles like "ge" for Partizip II or "zu"
                                            for "um...zu" clauses they come in the middle of the verb, between the
                                            prefix and the stem. E.g.: "Jetzt muss ich nach Hause zurückkommen, um meine
                                            Mutter anzurufen."

                                            Unstressed suffixes with "e-": I'm just neutral about this. But I don't
                                            think we need only using "e-".

                                            Hugo Cesar

                                            2007/2/25, stefichjo <sts@...>:
                                            >
                                            > My preference was about FS, not about DE in fact, sorry for the typo.
                                            >
                                            > David and Ingmar,
                                            > How do you feel about reaching a consensus on verb forms? I feel it's
                                            > proceding very slowly. :-/
                                            >
                                            > Verb issues are:
                                            > - subjunctive = infinitive ?
                                            > - suffix "-e" obsolete ? (gae vs. ga' vs. ga)
                                            > - trennbare verben ? (forgeve vs. geve for)
                                            > - unstressed suffixes with "-e-" ? (endschuldige vs. ondschuldige)
                                            >
                                            > My preferences:
                                            > - subjuntive = infinitive: _yes_ (meuge it rike to segge)
                                            > - suffix "-e" obsolete: (_gae_ = not obsolete)
                                            > - trennbare verben: (_geve for_)
                                            > - unstressed suffixes with "-e-": (endschuldige)
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > Stephan
                                            >
                                            > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>,
                                            > "stefichjo" <sts@...> wrote:
                                            > >
                                            > > Another article about the subjunctive in English. It doesn't hurt. ;-)
                                            > >
                                            > > http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxsubjun.html
                                            > >
                                            > >
                                            > >
                                            > > As you can see, English does know subjunctive, both for the present
                                            > > and for the past. Also German does.
                                            > >
                                            > > Famous sentence with present subjunctive
                                            > > EN Thy kingdom _come_ (not "comes")
                                            > > DE Dein Reich _komme_ (not "kommt")
                                            > > FS _Kome_ din rik / Din rik _kome_ (not "kom")
                                            > >
                                            > >
                                            > > We could have a basic register as well, of course, which could be just
                                            > > to ignore the possibility of using the subjunctive, or to use an
                                            > > auxilary verb like "should".
                                            > >
                                            > > Any suggestions?
                                            > >
                                            > > My preference for a subjunctive in FS is to use the infinitive (even
                                            > > though, one might say that the form of the infinitive is taken from
                                            > > the subjunctive form, which is more acurate).
                                            > >
                                            > > EN suffice it to say
                                            > > DE meuge it rike to segge
                                            > > DE rike it to segge
                                            > >
                                            > > Stephan
                                            > >
                                            > >
                                            > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>,
                                            > "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                            > > >
                                            > > > BTW, how come you say it is _unknown_ in _English_? Is Wikipedia
                                            > wrong?
                                            > > >
                                            > > > Stephan
                                            > > >
                                            > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>,
                                            > "chamavian" <roerd096@> wrote:
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > > Subjunctive is unknown in at least English, Dutch and Scandinavian,
                                            > > > > therefor I don't think it can have a place in FS
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>,
                                            > "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                            > > > > >
                                            > > > > > In other words: So yes, we have two conjugations: indicative and
                                            > > > > > subjunctive. The subjunctive form is used in order to have the
                                            > form
                                            > > > > > that we call "infinitive".
                                            > > > > >
                                            > > > > > from:
                                            > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinitive
                                            > > > > > Huddleston and Pullum's recent Cambridge Grammar of the English
                                            > > > > > Language (CGEL) does not use the notion of the infinitive, arguing
                                            > > > > > that English uses the same form of the verb, the plain form, in
                                            > > > > > infinitival clauses that it uses in imperative and present-
                                            > > > > subjunctive
                                            > > > > > clauses.
                                            > > > > >
                                            > > > > > Stephan
                                            > > > > >
                                            > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>,
                                            > "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                            > > > > > >
                                            > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>,
                                            > David Parke <parked@> wrote:
                                            > > > > > > > So I would propose:
                                            > > > > > >
                                            > > > > > > David, we have alread discussed this. It is consensus that
                                            > present
                                            > > > > > > tense verbs do not have any suffix.
                                            > > > > > >
                                            > > > > > > We have discussed and agreed that the infinitive should have the
                                            > > > > > > suffix "-e".
                                            > > > > > >
                                            > > > > > > I have proposed that the subjunctive present tense should
                                            > have the
                                            > > > > > > suffix "-e", what about that?
                                            > > > > > >
                                            > > > > > > EN "he insisted that you be present" (I hope this sentence is
                                            > > > > correct)
                                            > > > > > > FS "hi insistered dat du wes_e_ dar"
                                            > > > > > >
                                            > > > > > > Stephan
                                            > > > > > >
                                            > > > > >
                                            > > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >


                                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                          • chamavian
                                            ... each ... What s wrong with simply Din kyngrik schal kom , and ik wynsch dat ik ware en better mennisch ? (same ware as the past form) When I said I m
                                            Message 21 of 23 , Feb 26 10:13 AM
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "Hugo Cesar de Castro Carneiro"
                                              <hcesarcastro@...> wrote:
                                              >
                                              > My preferences:
                                              > For the subjunctive I want just like English, as the plural form of
                                              each
                                              > time...
                                              > Thy kingdom come (conjugated as in plural => we, they come)

                                              What's wrong with simply "Din kyngrik schal kom", and "ik wynsch dat
                                              ik ware en better mennisch"? (same "ware" as the past form)
                                              When I said I'm against a subjunctive in FS, I meant: against a
                                              special, seperate form for that. So unlike in (probably just written
                                              or formal) German. And the few examples in English are usually either
                                              fossilized constructions (e.g. from the Bible), or can be expressed
                                              differently in a simpler, more compact way.
                                              Don't forget that we want Folksprak to be naturalistic, but also as
                                              simple and regular as possible in that condition...
                                              Ingmar


                                              > I wish I were a better person (conjugated as in plural => we, they
                                              were)
                                              > But we should try to avoid using the final "-e", so it would be
                                              easierto
                                              > have only one form to present in indicative or subjunctive and in
                                              singular
                                              > or plural.
                                              >
                                              > I only think that the verb "wese" should have two forms, one
                                              singular and
                                              > other plural because it is too anomalous. The same mechanic was
                                              used in
                                              > Interlingua:
                                              > io es
                                              > tu es
                                              > ille/illa/illo es
                                              > nos son
                                              > vos son
                                              > illes/illas/illos son

                                              exactly the way I've always had this, in Middelsprake and in my FS:

                                              ik is
                                              du is
                                              hi/si/et is
                                              wi er
                                              ji er
                                              de er

                                              >
                                              > Suffix "-e" for infinitive: it should be used only when the stem of
                                              the verb
                                              > is not ended ina vowel => "ga" (Better to read and it would be the
                                              form of:
                                              > infinitive, imperative, indicative present and subjuntive present)
                                              >
                                              > Trennbar or not Trennbar: I prefer not using trennbar verbs, it is
                                              used only
                                              > in dutch and german and it uses difficult mechanics, like throwing
                                              the
                                              > prefix to the end of the clause. E.g.: "Gestern rief ich meine
                                              Mutter,
                                              > meinen Vater, meine Schwester und meinen Bruder an."
                                              > Or when one use some kinds of particles like "ge" for Partizip II
                                              or "zu"
                                              > for "um...zu" clauses they come in the middle of the verb, between
                                              the
                                              > prefix and the stem. E.g.: "Jetzt muss ich nach Hause
                                              zurückkommen, um meine
                                              > Mutter anzurufen."
                                              >
                                              > Unstressed suffixes with "e-": I'm just neutral about this. But I
                                              don't
                                              > think we need only using "e-".
                                              >
                                              > Hugo Cesar
                                              >
                                              > 2007/2/25, stefichjo <sts@...>:
                                              > >
                                              > > My preference was about FS, not about DE in fact, sorry for the
                                              typo.
                                              > >
                                              > > David and Ingmar,
                                              > > How do you feel about reaching a consensus on verb forms? I feel
                                              it's
                                              > > proceding very slowly. :-/
                                              > >
                                              > > Verb issues are:
                                              > > - subjunctive = infinitive ?
                                              > > - suffix "-e" obsolete ? (gae vs. ga' vs. ga)
                                              > > - trennbare verben ? (forgeve vs. geve for)
                                              > > - unstressed suffixes with "-e-" ? (endschuldige vs. ondschuldige)
                                              > >
                                              > > My preferences:
                                              > > - subjuntive = infinitive: _yes_ (meuge it rike to segge)
                                              > > - suffix "-e" obsolete: (_gae_ = not obsolete)
                                              > > - trennbare verben: (_geve for_)
                                              > > - unstressed suffixes with "-e-": (endschuldige)
                                              > >
                                              > >
                                              > > Stephan
                                              > >
                                              > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>,
                                              > > "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                              > > >
                                              > > > Another article about the subjunctive in English. It doesn't
                                              hurt. ;-)
                                              > > >
                                              > > > http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxsubjun.html
                                              > > >
                                              > > >
                                              > > >
                                              > > > As you can see, English does know subjunctive, both for the
                                              present
                                              > > > and for the past. Also German does.
                                              > > >
                                              > > > Famous sentence with present subjunctive
                                              > > > EN Thy kingdom _come_ (not "comes")
                                              > > > DE Dein Reich _komme_ (not "kommt")
                                              > > > FS _Kome_ din rik / Din rik _kome_ (not "kom")
                                              > > >
                                              > > >
                                              > > > We could have a basic register as well, of course, which could
                                              be just
                                              > > > to ignore the possibility of using the subjunctive, or to use an
                                              > > > auxilary verb like "should".
                                              > > >
                                              > > > Any suggestions?
                                              > > >
                                              > > > My preference for a subjunctive in FS is to use the infinitive
                                              (even
                                              > > > though, one might say that the form of the infinitive is taken
                                              from
                                              > > > the subjunctive form, which is more acurate).
                                              > > >
                                              > > > EN suffice it to say
                                              > > > DE meuge it rike to segge
                                              > > > DE rike it to segge
                                              > > >
                                              > > > Stephan
                                              > > >
                                              > > >
                                              > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%
                                              40yahoogroups.com>,
                                              > > "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > > BTW, how come you say it is _unknown_ in _English_? Is
                                              Wikipedia
                                              > > wrong?
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > > Stephan
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%
                                              40yahoogroups.com>,
                                              > > "chamavian" <roerd096@> wrote:
                                              > > > > >
                                              > > > > > Subjunctive is unknown in at least English, Dutch and
                                              Scandinavian,
                                              > > > > > therefor I don't think it can have a place in FS
                                              > > > > >
                                              > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%
                                              40yahoogroups.com>,
                                              > > "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                              > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > In other words: So yes, we have two conjugations:
                                              indicative and
                                              > > > > > > subjunctive. The subjunctive form is used in order to
                                              have the
                                              > > form
                                              > > > > > > that we call "infinitive".
                                              > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > from:
                                              > > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinitive
                                              > > > > > > Huddleston and Pullum's recent Cambridge Grammar of the
                                              English
                                              > > > > > > Language (CGEL) does not use the notion of the
                                              infinitive, arguing
                                              > > > > > > that English uses the same form of the verb, the plain
                                              form, in
                                              > > > > > > infinitival clauses that it uses in imperative and
                                              present-
                                              > > > > > subjunctive
                                              > > > > > > clauses.
                                              > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > Stephan
                                              > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%
                                              40yahoogroups.com>,
                                              > > "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                              > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%
                                              40yahoogroups.com>,
                                              > > David Parke <parked@> wrote:
                                              > > > > > > > > So I would propose:
                                              > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > David, we have alread discussed this. It is consensus
                                              that
                                              > > present
                                              > > > > > > > tense verbs do not have any suffix.
                                              > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > We have discussed and agreed that the infinitive should
                                              have the
                                              > > > > > > > suffix "-e".
                                              > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > I have proposed that the subjunctive present tense
                                              should
                                              > > have the
                                              > > > > > > > suffix "-e", what about that?
                                              > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > EN "he insisted that you be present" (I hope this
                                              sentence is
                                              > > > > > correct)
                                              > > > > > > > FS "hi insistered dat du wes_e_ dar"
                                              > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > Stephan
                                              > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > >
                                              > > > > >
                                              > > > >
                                              > > >
                                              > >
                                              > >
                                              > >
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                              >
                                            • stefichjo
                                              Due to the lack of feed-back volens-nolens, I take a break before I repeat what I have already stated. Stephan
                                              Message 22 of 23 , Feb 26 10:58 AM
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                Due to the lack of feed-back volens-nolens, I take a break before I
                                                repeat what I have already stated.

                                                Stephan

                                                --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "chamavian" <roerd096@...> wrote:
                                                >
                                                > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "Hugo Cesar de Castro Carneiro"
                                                > <hcesarcastro@> wrote:
                                                > >
                                                > > My preferences:
                                                > > For the subjunctive I want just like English, as the plural form of
                                                > each
                                                > > time...
                                                > > Thy kingdom come (conjugated as in plural => we, they come)
                                                >
                                                > What's wrong with simply "Din kyngrik schal kom", and "ik wynsch dat
                                                > ik ware en better mennisch"? (same "ware" as the past form)
                                                > When I said I'm against a subjunctive in FS, I meant: against a
                                                > special, seperate form for that. So unlike in (probably just written
                                                > or formal) German. And the few examples in English are usually either
                                                > fossilized constructions (e.g. from the Bible), or can be expressed
                                                > differently in a simpler, more compact way.
                                                > Don't forget that we want Folksprak to be naturalistic, but also as
                                                > simple and regular as possible in that condition...
                                                > Ingmar
                                                >
                                                >
                                                > > I wish I were a better person (conjugated as in plural => we, they
                                                > were)
                                                > > But we should try to avoid using the final "-e", so it would be
                                                > easierto
                                                > > have only one form to present in indicative or subjunctive and in
                                                > singular
                                                > > or plural.
                                                > >
                                                > > I only think that the verb "wese" should have two forms, one
                                                > singular and
                                                > > other plural because it is too anomalous. The same mechanic was
                                                > used in
                                                > > Interlingua:
                                                > > io es
                                                > > tu es
                                                > > ille/illa/illo es
                                                > > nos son
                                                > > vos son
                                                > > illes/illas/illos son
                                                >
                                                > exactly the way I've always had this, in Middelsprake and in my FS:
                                                >
                                                > ik is
                                                > du is
                                                > hi/si/et is
                                                > wi er
                                                > ji er
                                                > de er
                                                >
                                                > >
                                                > > Suffix "-e" for infinitive: it should be used only when the stem of
                                                > the verb
                                                > > is not ended ina vowel => "ga" (Better to read and it would be the
                                                > form of:
                                                > > infinitive, imperative, indicative present and subjuntive present)
                                                > >
                                                > > Trennbar or not Trennbar: I prefer not using trennbar verbs, it is
                                                > used only
                                                > > in dutch and german and it uses difficult mechanics, like throwing
                                                > the
                                                > > prefix to the end of the clause. E.g.: "Gestern rief ich meine
                                                > Mutter,
                                                > > meinen Vater, meine Schwester und meinen Bruder an."
                                                > > Or when one use some kinds of particles like "ge" for Partizip II
                                                > or "zu"
                                                > > for "um...zu" clauses they come in the middle of the verb, between
                                                > the
                                                > > prefix and the stem. E.g.: "Jetzt muss ich nach Hause
                                                > zurückkommen, um meine
                                                > > Mutter anzurufen."
                                                > >
                                                > > Unstressed suffixes with "e-": I'm just neutral about this. But I
                                                > don't
                                                > > think we need only using "e-".
                                                > >
                                                > > Hugo Cesar
                                                > >
                                                > > 2007/2/25, stefichjo <sts@>:
                                                > > >
                                                > > > My preference was about FS, not about DE in fact, sorry for the
                                                > typo.
                                                > > >
                                                > > > David and Ingmar,
                                                > > > How do you feel about reaching a consensus on verb forms? I feel
                                                > it's
                                                > > > proceding very slowly. :-/
                                                > > >
                                                > > > Verb issues are:
                                                > > > - subjunctive = infinitive ?
                                                > > > - suffix "-e" obsolete ? (gae vs. ga' vs. ga)
                                                > > > - trennbare verben ? (forgeve vs. geve for)
                                                > > > - unstressed suffixes with "-e-" ? (endschuldige vs. ondschuldige)
                                                > > >
                                                > > > My preferences:
                                                > > > - subjuntive = infinitive: _yes_ (meuge it rike to segge)
                                                > > > - suffix "-e" obsolete: (_gae_ = not obsolete)
                                                > > > - trennbare verben: (_geve for_)
                                                > > > - unstressed suffixes with "-e-": (endschuldige)
                                                > > >
                                                > > >
                                                > > > Stephan
                                                > > >
                                                > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>,
                                                > > > "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > Another article about the subjunctive in English. It doesn't
                                                > hurt. ;-)
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxsubjun.html
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > As you can see, English does know subjunctive, both for the
                                                > present
                                                > > > > and for the past. Also German does.
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > Famous sentence with present subjunctive
                                                > > > > EN Thy kingdom _come_ (not "comes")
                                                > > > > DE Dein Reich _komme_ (not "kommt")
                                                > > > > FS _Kome_ din rik / Din rik _kome_ (not "kom")
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > We could have a basic register as well, of course, which could
                                                > be just
                                                > > > > to ignore the possibility of using the subjunctive, or to use an
                                                > > > > auxilary verb like "should".
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > Any suggestions?
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > My preference for a subjunctive in FS is to use the infinitive
                                                > (even
                                                > > > > though, one might say that the form of the infinitive is taken
                                                > from
                                                > > > > the subjunctive form, which is more acurate).
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > EN suffice it to say
                                                > > > > DE meuge it rike to segge
                                                > > > > DE rike it to segge
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > Stephan
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%
                                                > 40yahoogroups.com>,
                                                > > > "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > BTW, how come you say it is _unknown_ in _English_? Is
                                                > Wikipedia
                                                > > > wrong?
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > Stephan
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%
                                                > 40yahoogroups.com>,
                                                > > > "chamavian" <roerd096@> wrote:
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > Subjunctive is unknown in at least English, Dutch and
                                                > Scandinavian,
                                                > > > > > > therefor I don't think it can have a place in FS
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%
                                                > 40yahoogroups.com>,
                                                > > > "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                                > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > In other words: So yes, we have two conjugations:
                                                > indicative and
                                                > > > > > > > subjunctive. The subjunctive form is used in order to
                                                > have the
                                                > > > form
                                                > > > > > > > that we call "infinitive".
                                                > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > from:
                                                > > > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinitive
                                                > > > > > > > Huddleston and Pullum's recent Cambridge Grammar of the
                                                > English
                                                > > > > > > > Language (CGEL) does not use the notion of the
                                                > infinitive, arguing
                                                > > > > > > > that English uses the same form of the verb, the plain
                                                > form, in
                                                > > > > > > > infinitival clauses that it uses in imperative and
                                                > present-
                                                > > > > > > subjunctive
                                                > > > > > > > clauses.
                                                > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > Stephan
                                                > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%
                                                > 40yahoogroups.com>,
                                                > > > "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                                > > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%
                                                > 40yahoogroups.com>,
                                                > > > David Parke <parked@> wrote:
                                                > > > > > > > > > So I would propose:
                                                > > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > > David, we have alread discussed this. It is consensus
                                                > that
                                                > > > present
                                                > > > > > > > > tense verbs do not have any suffix.
                                                > > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > > We have discussed and agreed that the infinitive should
                                                > have the
                                                > > > > > > > > suffix "-e".
                                                > > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > > I have proposed that the subjunctive present tense
                                                > should
                                                > > > have the
                                                > > > > > > > > suffix "-e", what about that?
                                                > > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > > EN "he insisted that you be present" (I hope this
                                                > sentence is
                                                > > > > > > correct)
                                                > > > > > > > > FS "hi insistered dat du wes_e_ dar"
                                                > > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > > Stephan
                                                > > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > >
                                                > > >
                                                > > >
                                                > > >
                                                > >
                                                > >
                                                > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                                > >
                                                >
                                              • chamavian
                                                Okay, have a nice break ;-) ... Carneiro ... form of ... dat ... written ... either ... expressed ... as ... they ... in ... stem of ... the ... present) ...
                                                Message 23 of 23 , Feb 26 11:58 AM
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  Okay, have a nice break ;-)

                                                  --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "stefichjo" <sts@...> wrote:
                                                  >
                                                  > Due to the lack of feed-back volens-nolens, I take a break before I
                                                  > repeat what I have already stated.
                                                  >
                                                  > Stephan
                                                  >
                                                  > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "chamavian" <roerd096@> wrote:
                                                  > >
                                                  > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "Hugo Cesar de Castro
                                                  Carneiro"
                                                  > > <hcesarcastro@> wrote:
                                                  > > >
                                                  > > > My preferences:
                                                  > > > For the subjunctive I want just like English, as the plural
                                                  form of
                                                  > > each
                                                  > > > time...
                                                  > > > Thy kingdom come (conjugated as in plural => we, they come)
                                                  > >
                                                  > > What's wrong with simply "Din kyngrik schal kom", and "ik wynsch
                                                  dat
                                                  > > ik ware en better mennisch"? (same "ware" as the past form)
                                                  > > When I said I'm against a subjunctive in FS, I meant: against a
                                                  > > special, seperate form for that. So unlike in (probably just
                                                  written
                                                  > > or formal) German. And the few examples in English are usually
                                                  either
                                                  > > fossilized constructions (e.g. from the Bible), or can be
                                                  expressed
                                                  > > differently in a simpler, more compact way.
                                                  > > Don't forget that we want Folksprak to be naturalistic, but also
                                                  as
                                                  > > simple and regular as possible in that condition...
                                                  > > Ingmar
                                                  > >
                                                  > >
                                                  > > > I wish I were a better person (conjugated as in plural => we,
                                                  they
                                                  > > were)
                                                  > > > But we should try to avoid using the final "-e", so it would be
                                                  > > easierto
                                                  > > > have only one form to present in indicative or subjunctive and
                                                  in
                                                  > > singular
                                                  > > > or plural.
                                                  > > >
                                                  > > > I only think that the verb "wese" should have two forms, one
                                                  > > singular and
                                                  > > > other plural because it is too anomalous. The same mechanic was
                                                  > > used in
                                                  > > > Interlingua:
                                                  > > > io es
                                                  > > > tu es
                                                  > > > ille/illa/illo es
                                                  > > > nos son
                                                  > > > vos son
                                                  > > > illes/illas/illos son
                                                  > >
                                                  > > exactly the way I've always had this, in Middelsprake and in my
                                                  FS:
                                                  > >
                                                  > > ik is
                                                  > > du is
                                                  > > hi/si/et is
                                                  > > wi er
                                                  > > ji er
                                                  > > de er
                                                  > >
                                                  > > >
                                                  > > > Suffix "-e" for infinitive: it should be used only when the
                                                  stem of
                                                  > > the verb
                                                  > > > is not ended ina vowel => "ga" (Better to read and it would be
                                                  the
                                                  > > form of:
                                                  > > > infinitive, imperative, indicative present and subjuntive
                                                  present)
                                                  > > >
                                                  > > > Trennbar or not Trennbar: I prefer not using trennbar verbs, it
                                                  is
                                                  > > used only
                                                  > > > in dutch and german and it uses difficult mechanics, like
                                                  throwing
                                                  > > the
                                                  > > > prefix to the end of the clause. E.g.: "Gestern rief ich meine
                                                  > > Mutter,
                                                  > > > meinen Vater, meine Schwester und meinen Bruder an."
                                                  > > > Or when one use some kinds of particles like "ge" for Partizip
                                                  II
                                                  > > or "zu"
                                                  > > > for "um...zu" clauses they come in the middle of the verb,
                                                  between
                                                  > > the
                                                  > > > prefix and the stem. E.g.: "Jetzt muss ich nach Hause
                                                  > > zurückkommen, um meine
                                                  > > > Mutter anzurufen."
                                                  > > >
                                                  > > > Unstressed suffixes with "e-": I'm just neutral about this. But
                                                  I
                                                  > > don't
                                                  > > > think we need only using "e-".
                                                  > > >
                                                  > > > Hugo Cesar
                                                  > > >
                                                  > > > 2007/2/25, stefichjo <sts@>:
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > > My preference was about FS, not about DE in fact, sorry for
                                                  the
                                                  > > typo.
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > > David and Ingmar,
                                                  > > > > How do you feel about reaching a consensus on verb forms? I
                                                  feel
                                                  > > it's
                                                  > > > > proceding very slowly. :-/
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > > Verb issues are:
                                                  > > > > - subjunctive = infinitive ?
                                                  > > > > - suffix "-e" obsolete ? (gae vs. ga' vs. ga)
                                                  > > > > - trennbare verben ? (forgeve vs. geve for)
                                                  > > > > - unstressed suffixes with "-e-" ? (endschuldige vs.
                                                  ondschuldige)
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > > My preferences:
                                                  > > > > - subjuntive = infinitive: _yes_ (meuge it rike to segge)
                                                  > > > > - suffix "-e" obsolete: (_gae_ = not obsolete)
                                                  > > > > - trennbare verben: (_geve for_)
                                                  > > > > - unstressed suffixes with "-e-": (endschuldige)
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > > Stephan
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%
                                                  40yahoogroups.com>,
                                                  > > > > "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > Another article about the subjunctive in English. It
                                                  doesn't
                                                  > > hurt. ;-)
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxsubjun.html
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > As you can see, English does know subjunctive, both for the
                                                  > > present
                                                  > > > > > and for the past. Also German does.
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > Famous sentence with present subjunctive
                                                  > > > > > EN Thy kingdom _come_ (not "comes")
                                                  > > > > > DE Dein Reich _komme_ (not "kommt")
                                                  > > > > > FS _Kome_ din rik / Din rik _kome_ (not "kom")
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > We could have a basic register as well, of course, which
                                                  could
                                                  > > be just
                                                  > > > > > to ignore the possibility of using the subjunctive, or to
                                                  use an
                                                  > > > > > auxilary verb like "should".
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > Any suggestions?
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > My preference for a subjunctive in FS is to use the
                                                  infinitive
                                                  > > (even
                                                  > > > > > though, one might say that the form of the infinitive is
                                                  taken
                                                  > > from
                                                  > > > > > the subjunctive form, which is more acurate).
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > EN suffice it to say
                                                  > > > > > DE meuge it rike to segge
                                                  > > > > > DE rike it to segge
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > Stephan
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%
                                                  > > 40yahoogroups.com>,
                                                  > > > > "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > BTW, how come you say it is _unknown_ in _English_? Is
                                                  > > Wikipedia
                                                  > > > > wrong?
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > Stephan
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%
                                                  > > 40yahoogroups.com>,
                                                  > > > > "chamavian" <roerd096@> wrote:
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > Subjunctive is unknown in at least English, Dutch and
                                                  > > Scandinavian,
                                                  > > > > > > > therefor I don't think it can have a place in FS
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%
                                                  > > 40yahoogroups.com>,
                                                  > > > > "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                                  > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > > In other words: So yes, we have two conjugations:
                                                  > > indicative and
                                                  > > > > > > > > subjunctive. The subjunctive form is used in order to
                                                  > > have the
                                                  > > > > form
                                                  > > > > > > > > that we call "infinitive".
                                                  > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > > from:
                                                  > > > > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinitive
                                                  > > > > > > > > Huddleston and Pullum's recent Cambridge Grammar of
                                                  the
                                                  > > English
                                                  > > > > > > > > Language (CGEL) does not use the notion of the
                                                  > > infinitive, arguing
                                                  > > > > > > > > that English uses the same form of the verb, the
                                                  plain
                                                  > > form, in
                                                  > > > > > > > > infinitival clauses that it uses in imperative and
                                                  > > present-
                                                  > > > > > > > subjunctive
                                                  > > > > > > > > clauses.
                                                  > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > > Stephan
                                                  > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%
                                                  > > 40yahoogroups.com>,
                                                  > > > > "stefichjo" <sts@> wrote:
                                                  > > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com <folkspraak%
                                                  > > 40yahoogroups.com>,
                                                  > > > > David Parke <parked@> wrote:
                                                  > > > > > > > > > > So I would propose:
                                                  > > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > > > David, we have alread discussed this. It is
                                                  consensus
                                                  > > that
                                                  > > > > present
                                                  > > > > > > > > > tense verbs do not have any suffix.
                                                  > > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > > > We have discussed and agreed that the infinitive
                                                  should
                                                  > > have the
                                                  > > > > > > > > > suffix "-e".
                                                  > > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > > > I have proposed that the subjunctive present tense
                                                  > > should
                                                  > > > > have the
                                                  > > > > > > > > > suffix "-e", what about that?
                                                  > > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > > > EN "he insisted that you be present" (I hope this
                                                  > > sentence is
                                                  > > > > > > > correct)
                                                  > > > > > > > > > FS "hi insistered dat du wes_e_ dar"
                                                  > > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > > > Stephan
                                                  > > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > >
                                                  > > >
                                                  > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                                  > > >
                                                  > >
                                                  >
                                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.