Re: Two meanings of "with"
- From: "John Atkinson" <johnacko@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2006 00:57:11 GMT
"Harlan Messinger" <hmessinger.removethis@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote...
It occurred to me that in each of the Indo-European languages I know, the word for "with", whatever its derivation may be, covers both accompaniment ("The boy is with his mother." "I'm going with David.") and instrumentality ("He cut his fish with a knife.") This holds for German "mit", Spanish "con", French "avec", and Catalan "amb". I can see why there would be a connection between these two modes, but it also seems to me not to be a necessary one.
Does this merger appear outside of the IE family? Is it present in any languages where accompaniment and instrumentality are represented via inflection rather than via prepositions?
It's definitely not present in Australian.
The vast majority of Australian languages have an instrumental case. The suffix involved has the same form as that of the ergative case; in some it's the same as the locative. Most common are "-lu, -dhu, -Ngu" which seem to date back to proto-Australian.
Almost all Australian languages have a cominative suffix. In most languages, its basic meaning is "having" -- attributes (having a beard, having hunger, (place) having water), accompaniment ("man *carrying* boomerang', "woman *and* children are coming"), temporal ("we go there *in* winter"). The comitative suffix varies between languages, but never (that I know of) coincides with instrumental. (It does coincide with locative in two languages).
Australian languages never use prepositions for these purposes. (Most don't have adpositions at all.)
John.
.
.
- References:
- Two meanings of "with"
- From: Harlan Messinger
- Two meanings of "with"
- Prev by Date: Re: [=SDC=] Announcement
- Next by Date: Re: Basque name formation?
- Previous by thread: Re: Two meanings of "with"
- Next by thread: Re: Two meanings of "with"
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|