The Philosophic Grammar of American Languages, as Set Forth by Wilhelm von Humboldt: With the Translation of an Unpublished Memoir by Him on the American Verb — John Shaqi
The Philosophic Grammar of American Languages, as Set Forth by Wilhelm von Humboldt: With the Translation of an Unpublished Memoir by Him on the American VerbBrinton, Daniel G. (Daniel Garrison)
Philosophy
The Philosophic Grammar of American Languages, as Set Forth by Wilhelm von Humboldt: With the Translation of an Unpublished Memoir by Him on the American Verb
Brinton, Daniel G. (Daniel Garrison)
Grammar, Comparative and general; Humboldt, Wilhelm, Freiherr von, 1767-1835; Indians -- Languages
The differences of the languages under comparison can be appreciated
most correctly by means of these three headings; but it must not be
forgotten that any language may use the first and one of the last two
methods, and that in languages which have a substantive verb
conjugated with and without auxiliary verbs, all three may be
employed.
I.
WHEN THE NOTION OF BEING IS EXPRESSED INDEPENDENTLY.
I must except from this class all instances where the substantive verb
is formed from a radical, inasmuch as this root, like any other, must
assume the verbal form, and thus come under one of the two other
divisions. In such case it expresses the notion of Being, either by an
auxiliary, as in the German _Ich bin gewesen_, or simply in the form,
as, _I am_. When it is remembered that the substantive verbs of all
languages are derived from concrete conceptions and impart to these
merely the general notion of Being, the above becomes still more
obvious.
Now if there is no root-form for the substantive verb, and yet it is
expressed independently, and not by another verbal form, this can only
be done either by the position of the governing and governed words, or
by linguistic elements which are not properly verbs, but only become
so by this use. In the former case the substantive verb is merely
understood, in the latter it appears in a definite word, but without a
fixed radical.
1. _When the notion of Being is understood._
One of the most common forms of sentences in American languages is to
bring together an adjective and a substantive, the substantive verb
being omitted.
Mexican: _in Pedro qualli_, the Peter (is) good.
Totonaca: _aquit chixco_, I (am) a man.
Huasteca: _naxe uxum ibaua tzichniel_, this woman (is) not thy
servant.
In the Mixteca language such expressions have a peculiar arrangement.
The adjective must precede the substantive, or rather the predicate
must precede the subject, as in the reverse case the words are
understood separately, and are not connected into a sentence: _quadza
ñaha_, the woman is bad; _ñaha quadza_, the bad woman.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account