Re: [tied] German "ge-" before participe perfect

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "P&G" <petegray@...> wrote:

> >in very stylish German it is possible to leave out the
> > finite form of 'have' in composite tenses in subordinate clauses.
> > Perf. ptc. withou ge- and 3rd sg. pres. (when with -t) are

similar.

> > You have to come up with something to distinguish them in that

type

> > of clauses (so either get rid of the 3rd sg -t or slap ge- on to

the

> > perf. ptc.)
>
> This cannot be the origin of the prefixing of ge-. Languages have

no real

> problem with some ambiguities; English copes well with ambiguity

between

> Perf. ptc. without ge- and 3rd sg. pret.; any ambiguity is caused

only by

> the omission of the verb, which is not normal, and the ambiguity

can be

> cured instantly by restoring the verb.
>

The only calamity that would ensue in that case is a confusion of
preterite with perfect, which is no disaster, not a confusion of
perfect and present.

> Ge- comes to signify entry into an act, or completion of an act,

and it is

> this completive sense that leads to its use in perfectives but not
> preterites. A link should probably also be made to its use on

nouns for

> collectives.
>

BTW Old Norse doesn't have many preverbs (if any), I'm reminded of
the fact the ge- prefix in German loans in Danish has become a
shibboleth, many of those words were purged 150 years ago by purists
during our wars with the German states.

Torsten