From: Miguel Carrasquer
Message: 35945
Date: 2005-01-15
>All of them end in -e.
>Miguel Carrasquer wrote:
>>>
>>> since you use "ilae" , demonstrative feminine pl is in Rom. "alea"
>>> Hmmm.. I make a mentaly check now.. do I make a mistake? "copilele
>>> alea",
>>> "lemnele alea".. no, there is no mistake. The demonstrative feminine
>>> for farness is "alea" and for
>>> nearness is "astea".
>>> which is the analogy here?
>>
>> Elementary.
>
>let see if so.
>
>> The feminine/neuter plural of the article
>> (illae > le) and the demonstratives ends in -e. Lemnele,
>> aceste lemne, acele lemne.
>
>I have the feeling you compare here right with left. You compare
>definite with undefinite for gathering this "-e", don't you? I don't
>know in how far your feeling for language goes thus I feel obliged to
>explain where I think is wrongleading comparation. We speak just about
>feminie plural now, so take a look:
>
>lemnele (lemn+e+le)= definite plural feminine made out of noun in
>nominative "lemn" + feminine plural marker "-e" plus definite article
>for feminine plural "-le": lemn+e+le. In this example it was easy since
>the searcing point for us was "-le".
>in the second example you use "aceste lemne" you use the _undefinite_
>form of both words:
>(acest+e lemn+e) : undefinite demonstr. pronoun "acest" + fem. plural
>marker "-e" positioned _before_ noun in nominative "lemn" + plural
>femine marker "-e".
>
>The _definite_ form for your example is not "aceste lemne" but "lemnele
>acestea". That is:
>(lemn+e+le acest+e+a)
>N msc. sg. noun "lemn" + plural fem marker "-e"+ definite article fem.
>pl "-le" positioned before demonstt. article msc. sg. "acest" + fem.
>mark "-e" plus deictic element "-a"(in fact, mark for definite). Even
>the position of the demonstrativa change its place when it is definite.
>So, which is the demonstrative you mean for fem. pl which ends in "-e"?
>I see there an "-a" for demonstrativa, not an "-e".The -a has nothing to do with fem.pl. and has even less to