LINGUIST List 13.111

Thu Jan 17 2002

Qs: Double Aspectual Constructions, "They"

Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <karenlinguistlist.org>

We'd like to remind readers that the responses to queries are usually best posted to the individual asking the question. That individual is then strongly encouraged to post a summary to the list. This policy was instituted to help control the huge volume of mail on LINGUIST; so we would appreciate your cooperating with it whenever it seems appropriate. In addition to posting a summary, we'd like to remind people that it is usually a good idea to personally thank those individuals who have taken the trouble to respond to the query.

Directory

  1. jlc115, Double Aspectual Constructions
  2. carljweber, "They"

Message 1: Double Aspectual Constructions

 Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 11:04:15 +0000
From: jlc115 <jlc115york.ac.uk>
Subject: Double Aspectual Constructions

I am working on the syntax of Double Aspectual Constructions like (1):

(1) He could have not have done that.

These are found in dialects of Scottish English and in dialects from the
North East of England. Does anyone know if these constructions are also
possible in any dialects of American English? Also, would anyone who
uses these constructions be willing to give some judgements?

Please reply to me directly.

Thanks,
Joanne Close
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 2: "They"

 Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 12:51:07 -0600
From: carljweber <carljwebermsn.com>
Subject: "They"


Given all that the OED says about "they" (and other pronouns) --
Your comments are appreciated.

1. What is the evidence behind the OED's presentation that "they" is Danish?
(a) Is it a "probably" type conclusion? (b) Is it based on similarity of
forms only?
2. Why was the older nominative all-genders plural pronoun replaced at all?
Were there developmental constraints, the result of reorganization during
the period of Norman dominance?

This "they" pronoun seems to have been the only trespasser into "basic"
English (with the other th-plurals later following). Has any native source
been suggested?

Carl Jeffrey Weber
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue