LL-L "Morphology" 2003.11.04 (09) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 04.NOV.2003 (09) * 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 Address: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org
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 (Zeêuws)
=======================================================================

From: jmaguire at pie.xtec.es <jmaguire at pie.xtec.es>
Subject: LL-L "Morphology" 2003.11.04 (03) [E]

> From: sam claire <samclaire at mybluelight.com>
> Subject: LL-L verb defects
>
> Hello:  Are there defective verbs in the other members of the
family?  Is
> English the only one?  (Some others coming to mind are: may,
must, can,
> will, shall.) Perhaps there are psychcolinguists at work
trying to reason
> how they happened.

Hello Sam and All,

"Defective" is an unusual name for these verbs. They are
normally called "modal" verbs nowadays.

They basically convey shades of meanings relating to
Possibility and Necessity. You will probably find most
languages have special turns of phrase for expressing these
concepts. See the French "il faut" or the Spanish "tienes que"
for "you must "; the Catalan "Potser" to express "possibility"
and "Cal" to express necessity. Possibility is amply catered
for, of course, in the subjuntive tenses of Romance languages.

The interesting aspect of the modals in English is the very
nuanced meanings they can convey. For example you
find "shall" "must", "should", "ought to" "needn't" as
expressions of obligation in English, each with a different
shade of meaning and use.

I have always wondered why speakers of the English language saw
the need to go into the concept of Obligation in such depth...
But that's another story, I suppose.

Regards,

Tom

----------

From: R. F. Hahn <lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net>
Subject: Morphology

Tom,

I have a strong feeling Sam was referring to a special type of modal verbs,
namely those that are "defective" in the sense of having lost their autonomy
as full verbs (from which they were derived).  "May," "must" and "can" are
defective in that they have lost their infinitive forms, while their
equivalents in related languages as well as other modal or auxiliary verbs
(e.g., "have", "be") have retained all forms, the reason being that they are
still used as non-modal verbs as well.

Thus, while writing a glossary or dictionary you would gloss something like
this (e.g., for German):

   dürfen 'to be permitted to', 'may'
   können 'to be able (to)', 'can'
   müssen 'to be obligated to', 'must'
   mögen 'to be likely to', 'may', 'might'
   sollen: 'to be destined to', 'to be supposed to', 'shall'
   wollen 'to desire to', 'to intend to', 'want', 'will'

Lowlands Saxon (Low German):
Inf.: dörven - könen - möten - mögen - schölen - willen
Present:
1st sg.: dörv - kan - mut - mag - schal - wil
2nd sg.: dörvst - kanst - mu(t)st - magst - scha(l)st - wult
3rd sg.: dörv - kan - mutt - mag - schal - wil
pl.: dörvt~dörven - köönt~könen - möött~möten - möögt~mögen -
schöölt~schölen - wült~willen
Preterite:
1st sg.: dörv - kun - müss - much - schul - wul
2nd sg.: dörvst - kunst - müst - muchst - schu(l)st - wulst
3rd sg.: dörv - kun - müss - much - schul - wul
pl.: dörven - kunnen - müssen - muchen - schullen - wullen
Past Part.:
dörvd - kund - müssd - muchd - schuld - wuld

The above are defective only in that their imperative forms, though
theoretically possible (*dörv(t)! - *köön(t)! - *mööt(t)! - *möög(t)! -
*schööl(t)! - *wil(t)!), are not used.  I assume that the picture looks very
similar in Frisian, Dutch and other Low Franconian varieties.  It is indeed
very similar in German and Yiddish.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron

================================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.
=======================================================================