Print

Print


Basilius wrote:

Consider-CAT belonging-to-ME (and-)know-HIM
having-CAUGHT(-something)
(and-thus-)obtaining-MOUSE.

And there seem to be other interesting possibilities.

What do you think?
---------------------

I like that kind of syntax very much. Quite a few langs
replace cases with "verbs"
The only trouble are ditransitive "minimal" verbs. "X gives
Y to Z". What is the verb for "to"? You'll end up with an
accusative and/or a dative, even though you'll use the
"verbs" "to affect" and "to address". Whether these tags are
called verbs or cases won't change much. Don't you think so?
Having either a dozen preposed verbs or a dozen suffixed
cases is only a question of dating a Khmer or a Finn. And
then you'll face the daunting problem of matching "case
roles" with aspects like in the pair "get/have",
"be/become", etc. There is also the problem of the actual
subject of the "participle". Is it the main subject, the
main verb, the object, the sentence itself? Regarding the
chaining of sentences, many langs do that too. But they
usually order sentences according to chronological
experience rather than according to cause-effect: "me use ax
(I) cut tree (it) falls reach ground" for "I cut down the
tree with an ax".
So rather than "nounless" I'd say it's replacing cases onto
nouns by verbs.

Mathias