Re: [tied] Laryngeal theory as an unnatural

----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick C. Ryan" <proto-language@...>
To: "LIST-Cybalist" <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2003 6:21 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] Laryngeal theory as an unnatural


> Trask has asserted in print that English possesses no simple future tense based on his strange redefinitions of many things. When I gave him an English simple future form ("he is to go"), Trask refused to address the example.

A simple tense consists of a verb root plus inflections marking tense (ususlly in addition to other things). The construction "is to go" is analytic (the quasi-modal "is to", corresponding functionally to the use of "shall" in earlier English, plus the verb). In what way is it "simple"?

Piotr