Hi Lynda,
--- Lynda Maynard <
lyndamaynard@...> wrote:
> I'm not positive about the cases, but in the
> sentences "This is she" and
> "that was nothing." the words 'this' and 'that'
> are definitely pronouns. And
Demonstrative Pronouns. But we haven't had any of
those yet, have we?
> even though we lazy Americans usually say "this
> is her", it is improper
> usage and "This is she" is actually correct
> grammatically.
Yes, as noted in lesson one, both the pronouns in
"This is she" are "compliments". Or is "this" the
subject and "she" the compliment? Doesn't matter
in Old Norse, as the verb "to be" is defined as
taking *two* "nominatives" - thus both words
would be in the nominative, regardless of which
one an English speaker would call the Subject
and which one the Compliment.
"This is her" is an example of treating the verb
"to be" as though it were *transitive* (that is,
it is something that you can do *to* something
else: like "see" - I can not only see, but I can
also "see my screen" (thus "see" is transitive)-
as opposed to "go" - while I can go, I can't "go"
something else ("go" is intransitive).
Verb transitivity is *language specific*. So you
cannot count on a verb that is in/transitive in
English being in/transitive in another language.
Transitivity tells you whether a verb takes
direct objects or not. As verbs in declined
languages can take indirect objects or no objects
at all, it is better to use the concept of
"valences".
The different, pre-defined possibilities for
words to be related a given verb in a sentence
are called "valences" (like valences for
electrons in atoms).
Valances can be required or optional. Valences
can further be case-specific. In English, all
verbs have a required valence for "subjects"
(nominative). That is, no sentence can exist
without a verb and a subject (ie someone or
something "doing" the verb).
In Old Norse, we have already seen that verbs
without subjects are possible. I have further
heard that zero-valence verbs are possible - ie
the single word "Rains." followed by a period is
a full sentence which means "it is raining". That
would seem to make using pronouns redundant.
In English, Verbs can also take direct and
indirect objects (nouns in the accustive and
dative cases, respectively). Because of the way
these objects are determined in English
sentences, it is impossible to have an indirect
object without a direct object. Thus, in the
sentence "I sell him a sword" it is clear that "a
sword" is the direct object (what I'm selling)
while "him" is the indirect object (who I'm
selling it to). In the sentence fragment "I sell
him", however, it means he is what I am selling -
I am perhaps a slave-trader...).
In declined languages "him" could change in form
between the two sentences noted above. For
instance in German, "I sell him a sword" would be
"ich verkaufe IHM einen Schwert" while "I give
him" (as in the slave-trader) would be "ich
verkaufe IHN". The sentence "ich verkaufe IHM"
would simply not make sense in German - you would
have to be giving something to to him. In other
words, the accusative valence (direct object) for
the German verb "to sell" is required if the
dative valance (indirect object) is filled.
So, in non-declined languages (like English)
verbs pretty much have to fill their valances in
order of priority: subject, then object, then
direct object (this is because the order in the
sentence is what determines which case the noun
is in). In declined languages, a verb can
directly take a noun in the dative case (indirect
objects) without any accusative (direct object).
This is because how you say a noun determines
what case it is in, not where it is in relation
to the other nouns.
For example, while "ich gebe IHM" doesn't make
sense in German (because in German the accusative
valence of the verb "to Give" is required). The
sentence "ich helfe IHM" (I help him) makes sense
(because "to help" has a dative valence in
German). "To Help" in fact has *no* accusative
valence in German. Thus "ich helfe IHN" is in
fact incorrect and sounds funny.
So, in declined languages, it is important to
learn the following details about any verb.
As usual:
The infinitive (to be)
The conjugation (am, are, is)
The tense (to, was, to hae been)
But in Old Norse also the valences:
How many ("to be" has two valences)
What case each valence takes (the first valence
of "to be" takes the nominative, the second takes
the nominative or it takes an adjective ("I am
tired"))
Whether the valence is required or optional (The
first valence is required (as in all English
words). The second valence is tricky: is "I am" a
sentence? I think not. "I exist" is a sentence
(that is, "exist" has a single required
nominative valence). I'd say both valences of "to
be" are required.)
Whether the optionality changes if other valences
are filled. (not for "to be", but for "to sell",
the accusative valence (what I'm selling) is
required only if the dative valence (who I am
selling to) is filled).
=====
Kindest Regards,
- DeepStream
|'''' ''''||'''' '||'''' '':
||'''' ''''|'|||'''' '||'''' '|'''':
||'|'''|'''' ':|||''''||'''' ':|||''''||'''' ':
|||'''' '|'''' '''|':|'''' ''''||''':|||'''' '|||''||''
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/