Langfocus - Strange Similarities Between Celtic & Semitic Languages!

General discussion about learning languages
Cainntear
Black Belt - 3rd Dan
Posts: 3534
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:04 am
Location: Scotland
Languages: English(N)
Advanced: French,Spanish, Scottish Gaelic
Intermediate: Italian, Catalan, Corsican
Basic: Welsh
Dabbling: Polish, Russian etc
x 8810
Contact:

Re: Langfocus - Strange Similarities Between Celtic & Semitic Languages!

Postby Cainntear » Sat Mar 30, 2019 10:08 am

IronMike wrote:
Doitsujin wrote:
jeff_lindqvist wrote:Ownership is expressed in a similar way in Russian and Finnish (and possibly some of their related languages):
I have a book = AT ME (there is) (a) BOOK
What is also weird is that the меня [= me] in У меня есть книга. is the genitive form of я [= I].

Why is that "weird"? "genitive" means "possession".


Hindi/Urdu has an interesting variant here:

They have possessive pronouns for inalienable position:
Mera beti — my aunt

And a locative construction for alienable possession:
Mera pas X — my closeness X
... but notice that this locative still uses the possessive pronoun.

Despite that difference, this is one of things that suggests the evidence in the video is cherry-picked: the Celtic and Indic migration from the Indo-European heartland occurred before the migration of the “have” speakers, so I believe it’s generally accepted that “have” wasn’t part of proto-IE at all, but a later innovation.
2 x

User avatar
Saim
Blue Belt
Posts: 680
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2015 12:14 pm
Location: Rheinland
Languages: Native: English
Others: Catalan, Serbian, Spanish, Polish, Hungarian, Urdu, French etc.
Main focus: German
x 2334

Re: Langfocus - Strange Similarities Between Celtic & Semitic Languages!

Postby Saim » Thu Apr 04, 2019 12:18 pm

Cainntear wrote:
IronMike wrote:
Doitsujin wrote:
jeff_lindqvist wrote:Ownership is expressed in a similar way in Russian and Finnish (and possibly some of their related languages):
I have a book = AT ME (there is) (a) BOOK
What is also weird is that the меня [= me] in У меня есть книга. is the genitive form of я [= I].

Why is that "weird"? "genitive" means "possession".


Hindi/Urdu has an interesting variant here:

They have possessive pronouns for inalienable position:
Mera beti — my aunt

And a locative construction for alienable possession:
Mera pas X — my closeness X
... but notice that this locative still uses the possessive pronoun.

Despite that difference, this is one of things that suggests the evidence in the video is cherry-picked: the Celtic and Indic migration from the Indo-European heartland occurred before the migration of the “have” speakers, so I believe it’s generally accepted that “have” wasn’t part of proto-IE at all, but a later innovation.


Meri beti - my daughter (feminine agreement)

Meri phophi (father's sister, father's cousin), khaalaa (mother's sister, mother's cousin), chaachi (father's brother's wife), mumaani (mother's brother's wife) - my aunt

Mere pas (postposition-type constructions trigger oblique forms)
2 x
log

شجرِ ممنوع 152

Cainntear
Black Belt - 3rd Dan
Posts: 3534
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:04 am
Location: Scotland
Languages: English(N)
Advanced: French,Spanish, Scottish Gaelic
Intermediate: Italian, Catalan, Corsican
Basic: Welsh
Dabbling: Polish, Russian etc
x 8810
Contact:

Re: Langfocus - Strange Similarities Between Celtic & Semitic Languages!

Postby Cainntear » Thu Apr 11, 2019 9:01 pm

Big "oops" to my completely forgotten Hindi.

Another thing I forgot to mention before is that as I recall it, it's largely accepted that definite articles tend to evolve in languages before indefinite ones anyway -- early IE languages had no articles, and the definite in most IE languages evolved out of the demonstratives ("the" being related to the old precursors of "this" and "that"; the L in il/el/le/la/les being from Latin demonstrative ille (sp?); der die das related to diese, das etc) and the indefinite article later evolving out of the number one.

What's interesting in the Goidelic branch (Gaelic, Irish & Manx) is that the definite article (an/a'/na/nan) has no clear relation to the demonstratives (seo/sin/siud), but more interestingly still is not phonologically a million miles from the number one (aon). The simplest and most straightforward explanation for the Goidelic languages not evolving an indefinite article is that this similarity probably blocked it from ever happening -- a reduced "aon" would be "an" and identical to the definite article, so evolving an indefinite article would actually paradoxically remove the definite/indefinite distinction.
2 x


Return to “General Language Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Mike373 and 2 guests