Re: The personal pronouns of PIE (and other families) are loans

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, g <st-george@...> wrote:

>
> >> In the approx. area between Suebia and Western Pannonia
> >> <bei dene Lait> [baj 'de:ne 'lajt] or farther to the East
> >> of this dialectal realm [bæ: de:ne læ:t] will suffice in
> >> order to express <bei jene*n* Leute*n*> (dative, plural).
> >> (<denen> replacing <jenen>)
> >
> > Please provide an example from southern dialect of a

prepositional

> > phrase with mit + accusative.
> >
> > Torsten
>
> I'm not sure that in my example above <bei dene> it's an

accusative or

> a (merely shortened) dative. All I know is that in this case <de>

can

> stand both for fem. acc. <die> and and fem. dat. <der>. E.g., in

the

> following text, nominative plural <die> is written <de> (and this

is

> how it's pronounced):
>
> <So wia des hoid is, _bei de Leit_> (dropped: -n and -en => bei

den

> Leuten) in an Austrian (Vienna) variant of the Bavarian dialect:
>
> http://bau2.uibk.ac.at/guerti/weanarisch/Haudi9.html
>
> <bei dene> and <mit de Leit> north of the "white sausage equator",
> namely in Hessen (i.e., in Middle German):
> http://www.aeppelsche-homepage.de/hessische_gedichte.htm
>
> <mit de Frau> in the Southern group of the Alamanian dialect

(here:

> Swiss German):
> http://www.aldertherwil.ch/Witz.htm
>
> <einigaungan, oda mit an Ross ghuit, owa san olle z`Fuß gaungan>
> (Austrian Bavarian)
> ("eingegangen, oder mit dem Ross geholt, aber sind alle zu Fuß

gegangen)

> content.grin.com/data/7/33514.pdf
> but AFAIK, usually, <an> is used as <den>, i.e., masc., accusative.
>
> neben + an ("ein(em)"):
> <Nur i wohn neben an Dokta und Du wohnst neben an Tschuschn!>
> (Austrian; Tschusch is a derogatory term for Yugoslav or

foreigner; in

> Bavaria known only from Austrian radio-TV)
> www.wer-weiss-was.de/theme204/article1522103.html
>
> Accusative <an>:
> <Wir brauchn an Dokta!" Leitstelle: "Wer seid's denn ihr?"

Zivi: "An

> Dokta brauch
> ma." Leitstelle: "Wo stehts denn? Wer seids denn?"> (Dokta

= "doctor,

> physician")
> www.rettungsforum.com/forums/topic1221.html
>
> Or Bavaria's Bavarian (by the Bavarian novelist and playwright

Ludwig

> Thoma, circa 100 years ago):
> <D'Mahm hat mi owag'schickt, und ös sollt's an Dokta hol'n lassen.

Da

> Loisl is
> am Luchseck g'schoss'n wor'n, und ös sollt's glei an Dokta
> telefaniern...>
> (<d'> "die"; <owa> here "ab-"; <ös>: this weird spelling might
> represent the
> remnant of the old Bavarian <ets> plural "you", which is repeated

in the

> <'s> that's added to the verb)
> www.buecherquelle.com/thoma/jagrlois/jager07.htm
>
> Even the der- prefix is pronounced [da] or [d@], and generally
> corresponds to the Hochdeutsch and er- prefix (in some cases to

zer-

> too):
>
> <»Hat ma'n dawischt?> ("Hat man den/ihn erwischt?")
> <in d' Latt'n eini...> ("in die Latte ein", i.e. "hinein")
> <Vo dem hoaßt's do, er waar daschossen wor'n?> ("Von dem heißt es

doch,

> er wäre erschossen worden")
> www.buecherquelle.com/thoma/jagrlois/jager07.htm
>

Some of it points in the direction of loss of dative as a category,
but the problem is I don't know whether this loss is complete or
only for certain articles, or adjectives, or nouns. I'd like to see
a statement to that effect (loss of dative) in a grammar of a
southern dialect (sorry for being so suspicious ;-).


Torsten