tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post2427049679254096418..comments2023-09-24T05:45:23.811-05:00Comments on Paleoglot: Ashes to ashesGlen Gordonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02440249042894225949noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-10573168809928392232009-07-12T17:30:29.868-05:002009-07-12T17:30:29.868-05:00Communication is a two-way street and in this case...Communication is a two-way street and in this case we both accomplished miscommunication together. Lol.<br /><br /><b><i>"So -0i can be: Latin "in + ablativus" (inessive) or Latin "in + accusativus" (showing direction)"</i></b><br /><br />Now I see what you're saying.<br /><br />I suggest to understand the postfix <b>-θi</b> as literally meaning "in". Glen Gordonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02440249042894225949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-32524004312614781172009-07-12T17:06:09.059-05:002009-07-12T17:06:09.059-05:00Aaaah. We have a miscommunication.
Not for the f...<i>Aaaah. We have a miscommunication.</i> <br /><br />Not for the first time! <br />Must be my English. <br /><br /><br /><b>"2)So -0i is not always a real inessive?"</b><br /><br /><b><i>No, it always is. In my example, I am going into the city (ie. within the city boundaries), hence spureθi. This form is attested in TLE 171 as well.</i></b> <br /><br />So -<b>0i</b> can be: <br />ZUhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06733661299497804284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-16183280127569812582009-07-11T21:21:53.886-05:002009-07-11T21:21:53.886-05:00Hans: "In Dutch the genitivus absolutus is se...<b>Hans: <i>"In Dutch the genitivus absolutus is seen almost exclusively in: 'Des morgens ...' [...]"</i></b><br /><br />Aaaah. We have a miscommunication. What I understood from "genitivus absolutus" was that the <i>*subject*</i> of a dependant clause is marked in the genitive case. It is <i>that</i> specific phenomenon, found in Koine, that I've never seen in Glen Gordonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02440249042894225949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-79087321671087135432009-07-11T18:31:54.763-05:002009-07-11T18:31:54.763-05:00Ah!
In Dutch the genitivus absolutus is seen almo...Ah! <br />In Dutch the genitivus absolutus is seen almost exclusively in:<br />"Des morgens ..." <br />meaning: <br />"In the morning..." (but it still needs something like "tomorrow" or "next year every wednesday")<br /><br /><br /><i>In English, a genitivus absolutus of another language acts as though it's the subject of the action</i> <br /><br />ZUhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06733661299497804284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-77102733159370004642009-07-11T17:44:22.908-05:002009-07-11T17:44:22.908-05:00Hans: "We (= you and I) think
tins must be a...<b>Hans: <i>"We (= you and I) think <br />tins must be a normal s-genitive/dative, always. Don't we?"</i></b><br /><br />I hope so. ;o) I'm just saying that an unmarked noun is consistently a nomino-accusative noun and a noun marked in <b>-s</b> or <b>-l</b> is consistently a genitive. In English, a genitivus absolutus of another language acts as though it's the <i>subject</Glen Gordonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02440249042894225949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-66680692690053618802009-07-11T13:54:53.384-05:002009-07-11T13:54:53.384-05:00I admit that I tend to be impatient.
Like me (, ...<i>I admit that I tend to be impatient.</i> <br /><br />Like me (, especially when tired and not being able to focus). <br /><br /><br /><i>No, I haven't noticed this. Even if I did, however, I would want to be very sure that this wasn't just a nomino-accusative form that I or others had mistranslated.<br /><br />An unmarked genitive would be an exception to the thoroughly attested rule ZUhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06733661299497804284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-52742925231937320762009-07-10T18:57:49.058-05:002009-07-10T18:57:49.058-05:00Hans: "No debate needed or wanted. I was just...<b>Hans: <i>"No debate needed or wanted. I was just curious: How could "they" possibly think tins is a nomino/accusative? [...] Inevitably this will sometimes be irritating. But I really mean well. "</i></b><br /><br />Apologies. Your intention wasn't clear. I admit that I tend to be impatient. I thought you had adopted this view and so I wanted your justification for it, Glen Gordonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02440249042894225949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-8074638108245228552009-07-10T12:39:38.849-05:002009-07-10T12:39:38.849-05:00Parroting what "they" say without eviden...<i>Parroting what "they" say without evidence in favour of these views is a little irritating and certainly unconstructive to informed debate.</i> <br /><br />No debate needed or wanted. I was just curious: How could "they" possibly think <b>tins</b> is a nomino/accusative? As I said, I never liked this Fremdkörper. <br /><br /><br /><i>Since it isn't adequately explained ZUhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06733661299497804284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-21657185616535587602009-07-09T18:41:48.174-05:002009-07-09T18:41:48.174-05:00Hans: "Many seem to think tins can be a nomin...<b>Hans: <i>"Many seem to think tins can be a nomino/accusative."</i></b><br /><br />Yes but again, <i>TLE 156</i> <b>tinas cliniiaras</b> is perfectly equivalent to Greek <i>Dioskouroi</i> in semantics, context and cult. Etruscan type-I nouns are regularly declined in the genitive with <b>-s</b>. These are the attested facts that need to be respected.<br /><br />Parroting what "Glen Gordonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02440249042894225949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-11950503962310323012009-07-09T14:48:49.099-05:002009-07-09T14:48:49.099-05:00Many seem to think tins can be a nomino/accusative...Many seem to think <b>tins</b> can be a nomino/accusative. <br />As a rule, the stranger a phenomenon is, the more proof you need. <br />But this also goes for <b>tinia</b> as a plural. <br />Is there any proof for this irregularity? <br /><br />A second question: <br />When I saw <b>tins</b>, I thought maybe it was a "genitivus absolutus", something like: <br />"In broad daylight&ZUhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06733661299497804284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-18838272093766076352009-07-08T22:09:13.370-05:002009-07-08T22:09:13.370-05:00Hans: IF tins here is a nominative, then: Tins (ve...<b>Hans: <i>IF tins here is a nominative, then: Tins (verb)ed it?"</i></b><br /><br />Yes, only if it were the case, but we can easily prove that it's not likely.<br /><br /><b>Tinas cliniiaras</b> (in TLE 156) is a direct translation of Greek <i>Dioskouroi</i> 'sons <i>*of*</i> Zeus'. Thus <b>tinas</b> (then <b>tins</b> on the Magliano Tablet) is a <i>genitive</i>, not Glen Gordonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02440249042894225949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-77434374672006355212009-07-08T20:16:41.952-05:002009-07-08T20:16:41.952-05:00Hello Glen.
In many lists (not your dictionary)...Hello Glen. <br /><br /><br />In many lists (not your dictionary)<br /><b>tins</b> <br />is mentioned as just another word for <br /><b>tin</b>/<b>tina</b>/<b>tinia</b>, <br />so not as a genitive/dative. <br />Anyway, I never liked the set<br /><b>tins</b>/<b>tin</b>/<b>tina</b>/<b>tinia</b>,<br />even without the <b>tins</b> element. <br />I do not know equivalents. This set seems to be an ZUhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06733661299497804284noreply@blogger.com