On Fri, 06 Aug 2004 22:31:07 +0000, elmeras2000
<
jer@...> wrote:
>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
>
>> >[JER:]
>> >I can't follow this. What in Basque is parallel with what in IE
>> >here?
>
>> [MCV:]
>> In the case of *e/o being a kind of relativizer:
>>
>> Basque PIE
>> -en subjunctive -e/o-subjunctive
>> -en past tense -e/o-perfect
>>
>> In the case of *e/o being a direct object marker:
>>
>> Basque PIE
>> normal order: Abs-V-(Erg) normal order: V-Obj-Subj
>> marked order: Erg-V-(0) marked order: V-Subj-Obj
>
>Is the message that the combination of subjunctive, past, and direct
>object amounts to a single natural concept?
Of course not.
You mentioned that e/o (the "thematic vowel"), usually
"expresses belonging", That reminded me of Basque -(e)n in
finite verbal forms. I should perhaps have mentioned that
-en is the Basque genitive marker on nominals. To me, it's
one of the great mysteries of Basque grammar why this
marker, whose presence in relative clauses is easily
explained (ikusten duda-n gizona : "the man which I'm
seeing" = "the man of my seeing"), also marks the past
tense. I haven't given much thought to its occurrence in
the sunjunctive.
A completely different issue, which I thought I had
carefully kept separate, is that of basic word order /
component order and tense / aspect. I could have mentioned
Biblical Hebrew, where the imperfect triggers VSO, the
perfect SVO syntax, or Arabic, where the component order of
the imperfect (prefix conjugation) is S=V, while the perfect
(suffix conjugation) has V=S, but since I was speaking of
Basque already, I chose to mention the marked order of the
Basque past tense with 3rd. person object, as explained a
few messages back.
=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...