🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: sci.lang
Article #300

Re: Native speaker wins one, loses one [was Re: C

#300
From: Michael Zeleny
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1992 14:49
76 lines
2700 bytes
In article <1992Aug1.044753.2975@Princeton.EDU>
mikulska@astro.Princeton.EDU (Margaret Mikulska) writes:

>In article <1992Jul30.112236.14313@husc3.harvard.edu>
>zeleny@husc10.harvard.edu (Michael Zeleny) writes:

MZ:
>>Unfortunately, the extent of my syntactical authority is limited to
>>the qualification of a native speaker.  Even that could be challenged
>>by someone who believes in first language attrition. 

MM:
>I believe, and I challenge. :-)

MZ:
>>If you want an >informed opinion, ask me about semantics.

MM:
>Agreed.

MZ:
>>plural accusative: yablok
>>plural genitive: yabloki
>>
>>[...]
>>
>>	*v Kieve zoloto bylo polno
>>		 GEN
>>
>> 	 v Kieve zolota bylo polno
>> 	         ACC

MM:
>No, no, no.  You keep confusing genitive with accusative (and vice
>versa).  

You are absolutely right.

MM:
>GENITIVE (roditel'nyj padezh): you ask "kogo? chego?",
>hence: 
>	Chego net?  Zolota; yablok.
>	Kogo net?  Mixaila.
>
>And therefore also: Chego/kogo bylo polno v Kieve?  Zolota; ix.  
>GENITIVE, without any doubt.
>
>ACCUSATIVE (vinitel'nyj padezh): you ask "kogo? shto?",
>hence: 
>	Shto ty vidish?  Zoloto; yabloki.
>	Kogo ty vidish?  Mixaila.
>
>(I decided to transliterate the Russian 'g' in "kogo" as /g/, despite
>of its pronunciation as /v/.)

Of course: it is the accusative case that coincides with the nominative
form for inanimate objects.

MM:
>My wild guess is that a possible source of your confusion is the order in 
>which cases are listed in grammar books: sometimes acc. is listed as 
>the second case, after nom. (probably because acc. and nom. are often
>the same), sometimes it's gen. that is listed as the second case,
>followed by dat., and then acc.

No excuse is available to me.  At least I may be allowed to plead attrition
of grade school grammar, rather than that of linguistic performance.  As an
extenuating circumstance I adduce 15 years of nearly uninflected language
degradation.  Mea culpa.

>-Margaret
>mikulska@astro.princeton.edu

remorsefully,
mikhail zeleny@husc.harvard.edu
"Un de mes plus grands plaisirs est de jurer Dieu quand je bande."
Technical Details
Message-ID: <1992Aug6.104931.14471@husc3.harvard.edu>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!caen!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!husc-news.harvard.edu!husc10.harvard.edu!zeleny
References: <1992Jul30.112236.14313@husc3.harvard.edu> <1992Aug1.044753.2975@Princeton.EDU>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!caen!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!husc-news.harvard.edu!husc10.harvard.edu!zeleny
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: Native speaker wins one, loses one [was Re: C
Message-ID: <1992Aug6.104931.14471@husc3.harvard.edu>
From: zeleny@husc10.harvard.edu (Michael Zeleny)
Date: 6 Aug 92 10:49:29 EDT
References: <1992Jul30.112236.14313@husc3.harvard.edu> <1992Aug1.044753.2975@Princeton.EDU>
Organization: Harvard University Science Center
Nntp-Posting-Host: husc10.harvard.edu
Lines: 77