> Von: Eldin Raigmore <[log in to unmask]>
> An: [log in to unmask]
> Betreff: What gets negated (was: 0th person in Rejistanian)

> On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:32:17 +0000, R A Brown 
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >[snip]
> >Firstly, to many of us, 'zeroth person' would suggest the
> >impersonal form found in some languages which is used when
> >we either do not know what the grammatical subject is or are
> >simply not interested. It is a verb form that lacks a
> >grammatical subject, like the Latin _uenitur_ or Welsh
> >_deuir_ which just says that someone, some people, or
> >whoever are coming.
> >
> >Secondly, of course, we have a natlang use where 'zeroth
> >person' denotes an inanimate 3rd (and 4th?) person as
> >opposed to "true" 3rd person who is/are animate!
> >
> >Mechthild's use seems to me to correspond more closely to
> >Latin _non uenitur_, which is a negative impersonal.
> >
> >Interestingly, Latin can distinguish between:
> >non uenitur - which emphasize the verb - there ain't going
> >to be arrival
> >nemo uenit = nobody is coming - which throws the emphasis on
> >the subject. It's no good hanging around, nobody will show up.
> >
> >	:)
> >
> >--
> >Ray
> 
> Essentially, then, she was proposing using "0th person" in order to have 
> the "negative" attached to the indefinite pronoun, rather than to the
> verb?
> 
> In English, we might have
> "Nobody is coming"
> vs
> "Everybody is not coming".
> 
> J. Randolph Valentine's on-line-available information on his "AIS301"
> course 
> ("American Indian Studies") suggests that Ojibwe pronouns include a suite
> of 
> six "indefinite pronouns", which mean essentially:
> Anyone
> Anything
> Everyone
> Everything
> Nobody
> Nothing
> 
> And Mechthild seemed to be singling out the "nobody" and "nothing" from
> the 
> others, for Rejistanian.
> 

This is pretty much it. An impoersonal form does not exist in Rejistanian. Rejistaniha'he'ny have to use different formulations for the 'it' and 'man' we talked about. What I was exactly geared toward the absence of things or persons. ie:

Hedje mi'kidhi.
Nothing 3S-happen.
or:
Hedja'kidhi.
0C1-happen
Nothing happens.


And:

Heta mi'ki'lanja'hadada.
No_one 3S-FUT-SBJ1-understand
or:
Heta'ki'lanja'hadada.
0C3-FUT-SBJ1-understand.
Maybe, no one will understand

> But all that discussion is about what is the best term to call the
> phenomenon.  
> (It probably isn't "0th person"; but what better term can anyone suggest?)
>
Ikath person. Ika pretty much means "dirty hack" or "temporary solution" in Rejistanian ;)
 
> Didn't she also ask whether the phenomenon was naturalistic and/or
> realistic 
> and/or attested in any living natlangs?
> 
> Because, clearly, it is, in more than one.
> 

My question was about that and about what I would call jaliex'tan or cromulentness though neither is an English word. ie: Was it done so far? Is it a good idea to do this?

I know that the 2nd question can't be answered intersubjectively but occasionally, the list did advise against $FEATURE for good reasons.

> 
> Mechthild, if I (or anyone else) misunderstood what you've posted, please 
> correct me (or us).
> 
You actually understood me correctly. 
-- 
Sanja'xen mi'lanja'kynha ,mi'la'ohix jilih, nka.

My life would be easy if it was not so hard!



GRATIS für alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT!
Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01