From: Piotr Gasiorowski
> I opposed the idea that a central verb as "to be" should pressed intoI didn't say that language was illogical. But I would say that the logic
> a new and more complicated mould than it the one it was already in.
> You then argue that that might be illogical, but then language is
> illogical and if I can't see that then I have a problem.
> I think theOther things being equal, a simpler explanation is preferable. It may
> problem is on the side of those that use this kind of reasoning.
> Basically you used have two types of argument in your posting:
> 1) the proposal is simple, therefore it is right, and therefore people
> who can't see that have a problem.
> 2) the proposal is complicated, but language is complicated, andI din't make any complicated proposals in my posting, did I? I only said
> therefore people who can't see that have a problem.
> As for Polish, it looks to me like Polish might have gone through aThe relevant part of the history of Polish is documented. Things were
> phase where the copula suffered a similar fate as in Russian: only 3rd
> person 'jest' and 'sa~' ('jest' and 'sut'') survived of the present.
>>From there the paradigm was recreated by constructing new 1st and
> 2nd persons from the stem 'jest-' extracted from the 3rd sg.