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

Re: FS word order, analytic order vs inversion etc.

Expand Messages
  • stefichjo
    Hi Hugo. I mainly thought V2 stands for the inversion of subject and verb, so without V2 Deutsch would be Gestern ich las ein Buch. like in English. I
    Message 1 of 57 , Sep 30, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Hugo.

      I mainly thought "V2" stands for the inversion of subject and verb, so
      without V2 Deutsch would be "Gestern ich las ein Buch." like in
      English. I never assumed that the word order in subordinate clauses to
      be the word true word order. Now I understand. Thanks.

      Stephan

      --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "Hugo Cesar de Castro Carneiro"
      <hcesarcastro@...> wrote:
      >
      > That's what I was saying... if there were no V2 in German the main
      clause
      > would be like the subordinate one, because "habe" would not be
      shifted to
      > the second position of the clause.
      >
      > One of the things that I don't understand in V2 is that in subordinate
      > clauses in Swedish adverbs called "clausal adverbs" (e.g.: inte (not),
      > aldrig (never), etc) usually are placed before the Verb1, but in
      main clause
      > it is place after it.
      > E.g,: Har är inte tjock därför att han inte äter skräpmat. (He isn't fat
      > because he does not eat junk food.)
      >
      > Maybe the clausal adverb is originally between the subject and the
      verb1,
      > but the V2 word order requires the verb to be before the clausal adverb.
      > Can someone help me telling if my theory about Swedish V2 is right?
      >
      > Another observation: Will the clausal adverb in the subordinate
      clauses be
      > between the Subject and the Verb1, as in Swedish, or between the
      verb1 and
      > the verb2 (or the object), as in the main clause?
      >
      > Regards,
      > Hugo Cesar
      >
      > 2007/9/30, stefichjo <sts@...>:
      > >
      > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com
      <folkspraak%40yahoogroups.com>, "Hugo
      > > Cesar de Castro Carneiro"
      > > <hcesarcastro@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Stephan wrote:
      > > >
      > > > ><hcesarcastro@> wrote:
      > > > >>
      > > > >> Beware David,
      > > > >
      > > > >I agree with Hugo.
      > > > >
      > > > >> German sentence without V2:
      > > > >> Ich das Buch gelesen habe.
      > > > >> With V2:
      > > > >> Ich habe das Buch gelesen
      > > > >
      > > > >without V2:
      > > > >Ich habe gelesen das Buch.
      > > > >*?*
      > > >
      > > > No Stephan, it would be really "Ich das Buch gelesen habe", don't
      > > forget...
      > > > german is SOV, not SVO.
      > > > Ich habe gelesen das Buch is SVO.
      > >
      > > So it would be "Ich das Buch las", too? Then I don't understand...
      > > German is SOV only in subordinate clauses: "_weil_ ich das Buch las",
      > > "_weil_ ich das Buch gelesen _habe_". Maybe you meant that and I
      > > missed that part? Sorry in this case.
      > >
      > > Bye,
      > > Stephan
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
    • chamavian
      ... hemma ... In MFS (my Folksprak): Ig ha blived in hus gester for de regen or Ig ha blived in hus for de regen gester Hamalander
      Message 57 of 57 , Oct 3, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "Hugo Cesar de Castro Carneiro"
        <hcesarcastro@...> wrote:
        >
        >> So the clause in Swedish would really be this one: Jag har stannat
        hemma
        > ensam igår på grund av regnet.
        >
        > Hugo Cesar
        >

        In MFS (my Folksprak):

        Ig ha blived in hus gester for de regen

        or

        Ig ha blived in hus for de regen gester

        Hamalander
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.