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

691Re: [Lambengolmor] [was:Acc. in -n and] valence of esta

Expand Messages
  • Hans Georg Lundahl
    Jun 15, 2004
      As 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 if mihi est had been
      replaced by habeo) or dative - as a qualification of mihi,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]
    • Show all 6 messages in this topic