Print

Print


On 27/10/2015 08:00, MorphemeAddict wrote:
> Because Latin moved words around a lot, e.g., separating
>  governed from governing.

In verse, yes - but poets have a tendency in any language to
stretch the language to its limits )and sometimes beyond).

In prose Latin was normally SOV, especially so in
subordinate clauses.  In main clauses the topic may get
fronted and focus may be shifted to the end.

In rhetoric, things like antithesis, prosodic rhythm etc
played some part also.

But in the English "Tom heard and saw the dog", we have two
verbs with the same subject and both governing the same
object.  As  B.R. George observed yesterday, it's just a
"conjunction of verbs."

Latin and, I suspect, most other languages, can do this
also, just like English.  More interestingly, what languages
can't?

But as I wrote yesterday the 'natural' Classical* Latin
would be:
Thomas canem auditum vidit - with no conjunction of verbs
and with _auditum_ coming right next to the noun _canem_.

* Medieval Latin word often reflected the L1 of the writer   :)

> It's just an impression I have, without evidence to
> support it with.

Video.

-- 
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
"Ein Kopf, der auf seine eigenen Kosten denkt,
wird immer Eingriffe in die Sprache thun."
[J.G. Hamann, 1760]
"A mind that thinks at its own expense
will always interfere with language".