Print

Print


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.