|
 |
It’s Archaic | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : General discussion |  | |
| Solfrid Cristin Heptaglot Winner TAC 2011 & 2012 Senior Member Norway Joined 5335 days ago 4143 posts - 8864 votes  Speaks: Norwegian*, Spanish, Swedish, French, English, German, Italian Studies: Russian | Message 41 of 50 08 March 2013 at 11:01am | IP Logged | |||||
|
I suspect I speak in a slightly old fashioned way in English, and my slang in French would be outdated mora than archaic (from the 70ies) other than that I do not think I use much archaic language in my TL. I am a dinosaur when it comes to my native language though. I still count in a way which was abolished before my birth, and will use words that 1% of those under 30 will understand.
I am with Iversen on that one - it keeps your language rich, and Norwegian is already under such a tremendous pressure from English, that if those of us who know the old words do not use them, they will simply disappear. 4 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
| Duke100782 Bilingual Diglot Senior Member Philippines https://talktagalog.Registered users can see my Skype Name Joined 4489 days ago 172 posts - 240 votes Speaks: English*, Tagalog* Studies: Spanish, Mandarin | Message 42 of 50 10 March 2013 at 6:25am | IP Logged | |||||
|
In the way the modern Filipino language is spoken, the preference for English loan words and words with
Spanish origins over words with older Tagalog origins is evident if compared to the language of our grandparents generation. Examples Before: Isusumong kita sa guro. Today: Isusumbong kita sa titser. I'll report you to the teacher. The word guro (related to the older word guru) is replaced by the titser which came from the English word teacher. Before: Bigyan mo ako ng dalawmpu, Today: Bigyan mo ako ng bente. Give me twenty. Dalawampu is the Tagalog word for twenty, but now the word bente from the Spanish veinte tends to be more common. 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
| outcast Bilingual Heptaglot Senior Member China Joined 4950 days ago 869 posts - 1364 votes Speaks: Spanish*, English*, German, Italian, French, Portuguese, Mandarin Studies: Korean | Message 43 of 50 10 March 2013 at 8:05am | IP Logged | |||||
Well, it depends what circumstance they are teaching you to suffix an object pronoun to the verb. In the imperative (but not in the negative imperative), you HAVE to suffix: - Dámelo! (give it to me!) compare to: - No me lo des! (don't give it to me!) (Just in case, in Spanish unlike other major Romance languages, the positive and negative imperative forms are different in the singular imperative, thus "dá" vs "no des", "vete" vs "no te vayas", "discute" vs "no discutas" etc. French has only one form and Portuguese while officially also having two forms tends to use only one form in colloquial speech. Italian simply uses the infinitive in the negative imperative) So only in the affirmative imperative must you suffix a pronoun invariably. In all other situations they must come before the verb. This includes double-object pronouns (both direct and indirect object pronouns present): Me lo dan. (They give it to me) Lo veo. (I see it) So indeed, "dánmelo" is archaic and never used in speech. The "optional" scenario is when the object pronoun is governed by an infinitive. In this case, you can choose to place the object before the conjugated verb OR suffixed to the infinitive: Necesito comprar la entrada. (direct object: "la entrada") option a) La necesito comprar. (before conjugated verb) option b) Necesito comprarla. (suffixed to the governing infinitive). Italian also allows this option. But French and Portuguese require placement before the infinitive (although in Portuguese when the object pronoun is "o/a/os/as" the rules of placement and orthography get truly wacky and complicated). Edited by outcast on 10 March 2013 at 8:10am 3 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
| Luso Hexaglot Senior Member Portugal Joined 6062 days ago 819 posts - 1812 votes Speaks: Portuguese*, French, EnglishC2, GermanB1, Italian, Spanish Studies: Sanskrit, Arabic (classical) | Message 44 of 50 10 March 2013 at 9:30pm | IP Logged | |||||
I don't understand what you mean when you say that in Portuguese we tend to use only one form. To use your examples, we say: Dá-mo / não mo dês Dá / não dês Vai-te / não te vás Discute / não discutas It's exactly the same. 3 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
| outcast Bilingual Heptaglot Senior Member China Joined 4950 days ago 869 posts - 1364 votes Speaks: Spanish*, English*, German, Italian, French, Portuguese, Mandarin Studies: Korean | Message 45 of 50 11 March 2013 at 12:38am | IP Logged | |||||
|
My bad, should have clarified in Brazilian colloquial portuguese:
Fala! Nâo fala! Dá! Não dá! etc. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Luso Hexaglot Senior Member Portugal Joined 6062 days ago 819 posts - 1812 votes Speaks: Portuguese*, French, EnglishC2, GermanB1, Italian, Spanish Studies: Sanskrit, Arabic (classical) | Message 46 of 50 13 March 2013 at 3:45pm | IP Logged | |||||
Oh, I see. I'm used to a lot of Brazilian colloquialisms, but I must confess I'd never heard these ones. Wasn't trying to be picky. :) Back to the grammar, I've noticed that (for the negative) we use the subjunctive mood ("modo conjuntivo" in Portuguese). Most of the times, we turn it around to use it in the positive also. It reminds me of German ("Konjunktiv I der Höflichkeit") or French (subjonctif): when you want to issue an order but don't want to come across as impolite. Now that I come to think of it, this is common to all the languages I know. EDIT: since we sometimes use the imperfect, it becomes more complicated: "Eu quero" => "Eu quereria" => "Eu queria" ... and sometimes, both are possible: "Eu gostaria de..." <=> "Eu gostava de..." ... or, more poetically: "Ai quem me dera..." (the last one is a bit tongue-in-cheek and off-topic, but also possible) Sorry for the rambling. Edited by Luso on 13 March 2013 at 3:59pm 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
| Medulin Tetraglot Senior Member Croatia Joined 4669 days ago 1199 posts - 2192 votes Speaks: Croatian*, English, Spanish, Portuguese Studies: Norwegian, Hindi, Nepali | Message 47 of 50 13 March 2013 at 9:30pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
In Brazil, the use of conditional in IF clauses is dialect-dependent:
1) Se eu tivesse dinheiro, viajaria mais (standard) 2) Se eu tivesse dinheiro, viajava mais (colloquial regional, used in the South, SP, RJ) 3) Se eu tivesse dinheiro, ia viajar mais (colloquial regional, used in Minas, ES) 4) Se eu tivesse dinheiro, iria viajar mais (colloquial regional, used in Northeast and in North) I lived in Salvador (Bahia), and the 2nd option is never heard there. 1) ; 3); 4) are used instead. Si tuviese dinero, viajaba más. is used in Spain, but it's not used in Argentina. Si tuviera dinero, viajara más is used in El Salvador. Si tendría dinero, viajaría más. is used in Northern Spain and parts of Argentina. (If I would...I would... is sometimes heard in informal US English; with 3rd conditional it's more common: Standard: If I had known you were coming I would have made a bigger cake. AE colloq: If I would have known you were coming I would have made a bigger cake. ) Edited by Medulin on 13 March 2013 at 9:41pm 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
| Luso Hexaglot Senior Member Portugal Joined 6062 days ago 819 posts - 1812 votes Speaks: Portuguese*, French, EnglishC2, GermanB1, Italian, Spanish Studies: Sanskrit, Arabic (classical) | Message 48 of 50 14 March 2013 at 6:59pm | IP Logged | |||||
You can add Portugal to #2 (globally) and to #3 (also possible). #1 is the written standard, but falling into disuse. #4 is also standard, but has all the drawbacks: it's not colloquial, is too complicated (even for a written text) and is falling into disuse. 3 persons have voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
