691Re: [Lambengolmor] [was:Acc. in -n and] valence of esta
- Jun 15, 2004As a latinist I cannot help bumping in when it comes to the
valence of a verb meaning "name".
Latin has double valence system for nuncupare:
1) nuncupare huiusmodi hominem regem
(two different accusatives);
2) nuncupare huiusmodi hominem nomine regis
(instrumental for the name):
For "I am called" Latin has "to me is the name", "to me"
being obviously a dative, but the name can be either
nominative (corresponding to acc. if mihi est had been
replaced by habeo) or dative - as a qualification of mihi,
standing in the dative:
1) nomen mihi est Gaius;
2) nomen mihi est Gaio.
The question is, Sindarin not being a case language, and
fossilised pronominal instrumentals tending to become
used as adverbs of reason, it would not be most secure to
assume that the name itself is the usual non-case-marked form
of it, whereas the pronoun, if fossilising anything except a
non-case-marked form, would fossilise the accusative,
irrespective of what syntactical case -- except nominative/subject
-- it was used for. Of course, some northern languages -- North
German "mir", "dir", English "him", "her", Danish "ham", "henne",
Swedish "honom", "henne" -- actually use some fossilised datives
as oblique pronominal forms.
Could this be of some help?
Höstrusk och grå moln - köp en resa till solen på Yahoo! Resor
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>