Re: Dative Case.

--- In cybalist@..., markodegard@... wrote:

> Torsten writes:
>
> > I recall from German lessons in school that you had develop a

sort

> > of "feel" the dative (Danish doesn't have it). It's okay to

replace

> > your native "for + N" and "to + N" constructions with datives but

it

> > doesn't really do it for your mind, so to speak. Those that

abhorred

> > the German language never seemed to get it.
>
> Umm. Danish. Where Hamlet, Christian and Joachim are Princes **TO**
> Denmark, while Hamlet, Christian and Joachim's equally royal but

less

> well-descended cousins are Princes and Princesses **OF** Denmark.
> English does have this sense of 'to' (a funny kind of
> sort-of genitive), but it's rare. Sort of dative, I think. 'A

Prince

> for Denmark' also seems possible (Henrik perhaps). Or have I

reversed

> something and got it wrong?
>

You're right: you're wrong. It's the reverse. Hamlet, Frederik (not
Christian) and Joachim are princes *OF* Denmark. The others are
princes *TO*. But the idea is a German import; some German nobility
aer "von und zu" their county or barony etc.

>
> There is that statue of Peter the Great, before the Winter Palace

as I

> think, the one on that great big granite boulder. It's inscribed,

as I

> recall, both in Latin and Russian
>
> To Peter
> By Catherine
>
> I always have wondered what cases those two lines are in.

The logical choice is dative and instrumental (Latin: ablative)
and I recall having seen that (on TV).