Random thought

Wednesday, 30 May 2007 17:13
pne: A picture of a plush toy, halfway between a duck and a platypus, with a green body and a yellow bill and feet. (Default)
[personal profile] pne

I wonder whether there are languages that distinguish comitative with ("I peeled the potatoes with a friend") and instrumental with ("I peeled the potatoes with a knife")—e.g. by having separate cases or separate usual prepositions.

They're the same in English (with), German (mit + dat.), French (avec), Greek (με + acc.), and Russian (с + instr.), as far as I know.

(Now that I've said it, I'm sure there are such languages; only I don't know of an example off-hand.)

Of course, it's possible to distinguish between the two by using synonyms or other word choice (e.g. together with to emphasis comitativity), but as for the basic choice?

Date: Wednesday, 30 May 2007 16:00 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] elgrande.livejournal.com
In Latin, you would use "cum + ablative" for the first meaning, but just the ablative for the second. In Esperanto, you'd use "kun" for the first meaning, but "per" for the second.

Date: Wednesday, 30 May 2007 16:02 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] elgrande.livejournal.com
What I would find interesting to know is whether there are languages that have two separate words for "without", i.e. a distinction between "I peeled the potatoes without a knife" and "I peeled the potatoes without a friend".

Date: Wednesday, 30 May 2007 16:58 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mendel.livejournal.com
Poor lonely potatoes.

Date: Wednesday, 30 May 2007 17:33 (UTC)
ext_78: A picture of a plush animal. It looks a bit like a cross between a duck and a platypus. (Default)
From: [identity profile] pne.livejournal.com
In Esperanto, you'd use "kun" for the first meaning, but "per" for the second.

Oh! I would've used "kun" for both, I think. Native language influence :)

Date: Wednesday, 30 May 2007 18:49 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] muckefuck.livejournal.com
What a naïve question! Of course there are languages with this distinction; the only question is which ones and what constructions do they use?

Osage verbs take the instrumental prefix i-. Thus hcuke ibraache "I ate it with a spoon" vs. braache žįkažįka ška "I ate it with the children" (lit. "I ate it, the children also").

Korean has distinct instrumental [(으)로 /(u)lo/] and comitative [와 ~ 과 /oa/ ~ koa/] endings, so there's no possibility of confusion. IIRC, Hungarian and Finnish do, too.

Chinese uses distinct co-verbs: 我使刀切紙 wǒ shǐ dāo qiè zhǐ "I cut paper with a knife" (lit. "I use knife, cut paper" or even "I cause [knife cut paper]" vs. 我跟你切紙 wǒ gēn nǐ qiè zhǐ "I cut paper with you" (lit. "I follow you, cut paper").

On the other hand, Turkish has one suffix for both--(i)le--so the polysemy isn't just a shared SAE feature.

Date: Saturday, 16 June 2007 22:00 (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
使 shǐ? What about 用 yòng?

David Marjanović

Date: Sunday, 17 June 2007 01:41 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] muckefuck.livejournal.com
You're right, 使 shǐ is more accurately viewed as a causative marker whereas 用 yòng has a more strictly instrumental sense. The latter is what I used in my full-length entry (http://muckefuck.livejournal.com/521251.html) based on this brief, quick comment.

Date: Wednesday, 30 May 2007 21:40 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] node-ue.livejournal.com
Japanese does as well, I'm pretty sure, but I'm not 100% sure of the forms because it's been a while since I studied that language.

I'm pretty sure -と(一緒に) = "to (ʔiʃːo ni)" is the comitative ending (where 一緒に = "ʔiʃːo ni" means "together", and と = "to" more often is found in contexts where it would be translated as "and". An example is 家族と旅行した = kazokɯ to rjokoː ʃita, "I went travelling with my family" (lit. family trip do--)

I'm not sure about the instrumental, I just know it's not と = "to".

Date: Thursday, 31 May 2007 07:09 (UTC)
ext_78: A picture of a plush animal. It looks a bit like a cross between a duck and a platypus. (Default)
From: [identity profile] pne.livejournal.com
ISTR the instrumental might be "de".

Date: Monday, 16 July 2007 19:05 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tenou-k.livejournal.com
Definitely is.

Date: Wednesday, 30 May 2007 22:18 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ubykhlives.livejournal.com
Ubykh is one such language. It uses the suffix -aala to express the comitative, and -awn(ə) for the instrumental.

Also, obviously Basque's comitative case (-(r)ekin) marks the comitative, and the instrumental case (-(e)z) the instrumental. ;)

Date: Friday, 1 June 2007 23:38 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] joliecanard.livejournal.com
Actually, Russian (and Bosnian/Serbian/Croatian) differentiate the two cases. The first is c + inst, the second is just the object in instrumental case, no preposition.

Date: Friday, 1 June 2007 23:43 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] joliecanard.livejournal.com
Obviously I mean object as a synonym of "thing" and not in its grammatical term sense.

Also, I am reasonably sure the other East Slavic langs do this as well. Macedonian and Bulgarian, having lost cases, lost this distinction, and both are indicated with the same preposition.

Date: Saturday, 2 June 2007 07:43 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tisoi.livejournal.com
In Tagalog, verbs can have a "social" (or comitative) prefix and also instrumental.

Nakipagbalat ako ng patatas sa kaibigan ko.
"I peeled potatoes with my friend."

Ipinambalat ko ng patatas ang kutsilyo.
"I peeled potatoes with the knife."

Date: Saturday, 2 June 2007 07:52 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tisoi.livejournal.com
BTW, the first sentence sounds very awkward to me. In normal conversation I probably would use a generic verb.

Profile

pne: A picture of a plush toy, halfway between a duck and a platypus, with a green body and a yellow bill and feet. (Default)
Philip Newton

June 2015

S M T W T F S
 12 3456
78910111213
14151617181920
2122232425 2627
282930    

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Monday, 7 July 2025 15:55
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios