The 'have' of possession

Liste des GroupesRevenir à s lang 
Sujet : The 'have' of possession
De : peter (at) *nospam* pmoylan.org.invalid (Peter Moylan)
Groupes : sci.lang alt.usage.english
Date : 30. Apr 2024, 07:54:10
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v0q124$29skf$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent : Mozilla/5.0 (OS/2; Warp 4.5; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.8.0
I don't usually post to sci.lang, because I'm not a linguist, but this
topic is one that needs expert input. I hope nobody minds the cross-post
to the newsgroup I normally inhabit.
Almost all European languages have a "have" verb to indicate possession.
(And has other uses, but that's a separate topic.) The Irish language is
an exception, in that it lets a preposition do the job of a verb. The
equivalent of English "I have an apple" is "Tá úll agam", literally "Is
apple at me".
Scots Gaelic is similar (Tha ubhal agam), and so is Welsh (Mae gen i afal).
And so is Russian. The Russian for "I have an apple" is "у меня есть
яблоко", literally "at me is apple". Apart from word order, this is
identical to the Irish example.
This bothers me. What should (most) Celtic languages and (some) Slavic
languages share a feature that is not found in the many languages that
sit geographically between them?
My question: does this suggest that the Slavs and the Celts were in
contact at a critical time of language evolution?
An alternative possibility, I suppose, is that this used to be a
standard feature of IE, one that most of the successor languages
eventually lost. But that sounds less likely to me.
--
Peter Moylan                         http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

Date Sujet#  Auteur
30 Apr 24 * The 'have' of possession13Peter Moylan
30 Apr 24 +* Re: The 'have' of possession5Aidan Kehoe
30 Apr 24 i`* Re: The 'have' of possession4Peter Moylan
30 Apr 24 i +* Re: The 'have' of possession2jerryfriedman
1 May 24 i i`- Re: The 'have' of possession1Peter Moylan
30 Apr 24 i `- Re: The 'have' of possession1Christian Weisgerber
30 Apr 24 +- Re: The 'have' of possession1Ross Clark
30 Apr 24 +- Re: The 'have' of possession1Antonio Marques
30 Apr 24 +* Re: The 'have' of possession2Christian Weisgerber
1 May 24 i`- Re: The 'have' of possession1Tim Lang
2 May 24 +- Re: The 'have' of possession1Snidely
2 May 24 `* Re: The 'have' of possession2Hibou
3 May 24  `- Re: The 'have' of possession1Peter Moylan

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal