Re: Latin - English derivatives

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "fortuna11111" <fortuna11111@...>
wrote:

>
> > And if you'd translated that
> > literally, there'd have been no
> > confusion! It's 'p.p.p.' in English
> > too, but for 'perfect passive
> > participle' as opposed to the
> > 'present active participle'. But we
> > usually just refer to the 3
> > participles by tense.
>
> Richard, I hope you understand that most of the terminology I get

here

> is in German. The usual way a German thinks, without being a
> linguist, is: 1. Präsens, 2. Präteritum, 3. Perfekt (PPP) (referring
> to the German verbs, of course). That's the usual way you do it in
> school, but many people don't know even that, ahem.

What's happened to the 'Plus Perfekt', or whatever they call the
pluperfect tense?

> Literal translations are not always correct.

These terms are Latin in German dress. Literal translation is fairly
safe here, for in English we similarly have Latin in English dress,
which is a bit more evolved. 'Preterite' is however rather a rare
term in English. Translation problems arise when 'simple language'
or native terms are used. I find Miguel much easier to understand
when he uses Latin (not Romance) rather than German terms. It's my
failing here - one ought to know German to study PIE!

> When studying English
> synchronically, the PPP was always past participle for me (so I am
> aware of this term).

I suspect PPP is itself a calque on Greek, which had a rich
collection of participles.

> Btw, today I heard another reading of PPP: Partizip Präteritum

Passiv.

> Was this a mistake? I did not have time to ask and anyway, I could
> have embarrassed the guy, so I preferred to check it myself.

I'd say it's not good if the German 'imperfect', as we call it in our
schools, is being called the 'praeterit' (or similar). I thought the
German perfect now included the meaning of the simple past.

Richard.