The Philosophic Grammar of American Languages, as Set Forth by Wilhelm von Humboldt: With the Translation of an Unpublished Memoir by Him on the American VerbBrinton, Daniel G. (Daniel Garrison)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The Philosophic Grammar of American Languages, as Set Forth by Wilhelm von Humboldt: With the Translation of an Unpublished Memoir by Him on the American Verb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
1. The Maipure, Abipone, Mbaya and Mocobi languages place only the
personal sign in intimate connection with the verb, and allow the tense
and mode signs to be loosely attached. They have therefore but one type
of personal forms to be applied in every tense and mode by means of the
particles or the affixes formed from them. This type, taken alone,
usually forms the present; but, accurately speaking, this name cannot be
assigned it; because the signs of the other tenses are also dropped when
this can be done without obscurity. _Ya-chaguani-me-yaladi._ Here the
first word is in the indefinite form, though it is not the present but
the perfect. The _me_ is really the preposition “in;” but usage has
adopted it for the subjunctive sign, and so the Spanish grammarians call
it; or rather, the verb is considered to be introduced by a conjunction,
“if,” “as,” so that it is usually not in the present but a past tense.
If this is the case with the last verb, the first one must have the same
tense, and so the whole phrase, without any tense sign, means, “I had
helped him when I said it.”
One would scarcely expect to find anything like this in cultivated
languages. Yet it does occur in both Sanscrit and Greek. The now
meaningless particle _sma_ in Sanscrit when it follows the present
changes it into a past, and in Greek αν alters the indicative into a
subjunctive.
To form this general type, the Maipure makes use of the unchanged
possessive pronoun, and treats nouns and verbs in the same manner. The
noun must always be united to a possessive pronoun, a trait common to
all the Orinoco tongues and many other American languages. In the 3d
person sing., however, neither the verb nor the noun has such a
pronoun, but it is to be understood; _nuani_, my son; _ani_, alone,
not son, but “his son.” The 3d pers. sing. of the verb is often the
mere stem, without a personal sign, but that this peculiarity should
also extend to the noun I have met only in this tongue. It is evident
that a pronoun is considered as essential to a noun as to a verb, and
although a similar usage is found in many tongues, yet it appears in
none so binding. There are, indeed, some nouns which are free from the
necessity of thinking them in connection with a person, but these have
the suffix _ti_, which is dropped when the possessive pronoun is
added; _java ti_, a hatchet, _nu java_, my hatchet. From this it is
evident that _ti_ does not belong to the stem, and is incompatible
with the use of a possessive, hence it is the sign of the substantive,
in its independent condition. The same occurs in Mexican, and the
chief termination of substantives, _tli_, is almost identical in sound
with that in the Maipure.
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