LL-L "Grammar" 2005.10.08 (01) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
http://www.lowlands-l.net * lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Rules & Guidelines: http://www.lowlands-l.net/index.php?page=rules
Posting: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org or lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Commands ("signoff lowlands-l" etc.): listserv at listserv.net
Server Manual: http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html
Archives: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-8) [Please switch your view mode to it.]
=======================================================================
You have received this because you have been subscribed upon request.
To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l" as message
text from the same account to listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or
sign off at http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
=======================================================================
A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian B=Brabantish D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian
L=Limburgish LS=Lowlands Saxon (Low German) N=Northumbrian
S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic V=(West) Flemish Z=Zeelandic (Zeeuws)
=======================================================================

   L O W L A N D S - L * 08 October 2005 * Volume 01
=======================================================================

From: Theo Homan <theohoman at yahoo.com>
Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2005.10.06 (10) [E]

> From: Ian Pollock<ispollock at shaw.ca>
> Subject: LL-L "Grammar"
>
> Hello!
> I was thinking the other day about how common
> suppletion seems to be in
> Indo-European languages in very specific
> circumstances. (Suppletion is the
> replacement of one part of the paradigm of a word by
> another, unrelated
> word, e.g., "to go/went" (where 'went' is properly
> from the verb "to wend"
> as in "to wend one's way up a mountain path).")
> What strikes me is that the *place* where suppletion
> occurs seems to be very
> consistent across languages in some cases, whereas
> the actual words involved
> are etymologically unrelated. Let me show you what I
> mean:
> English:
> 1.) good / better / best
> 2.) bad / worse / worst
> 3.) much / more / most
> Spanish:
> 1.) bueno / mejor / (lo) mejor
> 2.) malo / peor / (lo) peor
> 3.) mucho / más / (lo) más

[...]

> Any ideas, or am I barking up a nonexistent tree?
> -Ian Pollock.
>
-------------------------
Hello,

As far as I know, there never is said much about this
topic. Although extremely interesting.

'Thinking problems' about this topic arose when we
started to write grammars. When classifying, we find
'exeptions'.
But 'common language users' seldom feel exeptions.

The case of /good/ and /bad/ is very striking.
I think dat when saying 'worse / better' we
don't/didn't feel a comparison.
But when I say 'I'm happier' we feel a comparison.

 : something like that.

vr.gr.
Theo Homan 

==============================END===================================
* Please submit postings to lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org.
* Postings will be displayed unedited in digest form.
* Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
* Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
  to be sent to listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or at
  http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
======================================================================