On Oct 15, 2009, at 2:01 AM, R A Brown wrote: > Not so the Latin ones - they definitely relate to the proximity or > otherwise (either in time or space) from speaker/writer and listener/ > reader. So, for example: > haec patria = this country of ours > haec uita = this present life > haec omnia = everything around me > > cur ista quaeris? = Why do you put those questions of yours? > opinio ista = that belief of yours > Gaius iste = that Gaius of yours, i.e. your friend Gaius > > In the language of law courts, _hic_ is often used to mean "my > client", while _iste_ means "the guy you're defending". i.e. my > opponent. I've wondered many times, so I guess I might as well ask, in case anyone knows: 1. Do any languages have their 1st-/2nd-/3rd-person pronouns transparently related to their proximal/medial/distal demonstratives? 2. Do personal pronouns ever derive historically from demonstratives, or vice versa? 3. Does person/number/gender agreement marking on verbs, or possessive marking on nouns, ever derive from demonstratives? ObConlang: I've had an idea for a language where verbs can be marked with a marker which denotes that at least *one* of the following is true: - The speaker is the subject, agent, or patient (or indirect object or other relation). - The verb is present tense. - The verb takes place near the speaker. The marker would be obligatory on any verb where any of the above is true, and it wouldn't be allowed if they were all false. I can't think of what sorts of elaborations on this concept I've come up with.