Re: YSID
- From: netcat <netcat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 17:59:49 +0300
In article <KJBxqp.1ME0@xxxxxxxxxxx>, djheydt@xxxxxxxxxxx says...
In article <63ed008c-c00e-4d32-9c6f-09cf3c151207@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Paul Clarke <paul.clarke@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 8 May, 11:51, netcat <net...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <KJApID.1...@xxxxxxxxxxx>, djhe...@xxxxxxxxxxx says...
As to tenses: Indo-European languages (all of them, AFAIK)
divide time into three boxes, past present and future.
Estonian, not being Indo-European, doesn't have a grammatical future
tense.
According to many linguists the Germanic languages, including English,
don't have a future tense either - see, for example, the Language Log
post at http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=897. ObSF: one of the
comments on that post is from Suzette Haden Elgin.
It has a construction that serves as one.
English has its 'will' and 'shall' but we really don't. We could, in a
roundabout pinch, use the German "werden", translated, but that never
ends up sounding natural. In Estonian, it "rains today" and it "rains
tomorrow".
rgds,
netcat
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: YSID
- From: Dorothy J Heydt
- Re: YSID
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: YSID
- Next by Date: Re: YSID
- Previous by thread: Re: YSID
- Next by thread: Re: YSID
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|