Verse:Irta/Naeng: Difference between revisions

Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
Line 5: Line 5:


Czech Naeng has a bit more SAE syntax as well as loanwords from Latin, but certain non-SAE features in contemporary vernacular Naeng but absent in literary Naeng are exaggerated; for instance, Czech Naeng strongly prefers verbs of motion rather than pronouns. The articles ''se'' and ''fi'' are also commonly mixed up especially for younger speakers of Czech Naeng, so the article system turns into a specific/nonspecific one. The most notable SAE-ism in Czech Naeng is the use of ''ruay'' for a perfective or telic aspect, for instance ''Fi rüech ruay patsrin fi muad'' "The bird ate the fruit". This is also used in impersonal sentences, such as ''Ruay patsrin fi muad.'' "The fruit has been/was eaten."
Czech Naeng has a bit more SAE syntax as well as loanwords from Latin, but certain non-SAE features in contemporary vernacular Naeng but absent in literary Naeng are exaggerated; for instance, Czech Naeng strongly prefers verbs of motion rather than pronouns. The articles ''se'' and ''fi'' are also commonly mixed up especially for younger speakers of Czech Naeng, so the article system turns into a specific/nonspecific one. The most notable SAE-ism in Czech Naeng is the use of ''ruay'' for a perfective or telic aspect, for instance ''Fi rüech ruay patsrin fi muad'' "The bird ate the fruit". This is also used in impersonal sentences, such as ''Ruay patsrin fi muad.'' "The fruit has been/was eaten."
Another common SAE-ism is the use of dative external possession.
7,723

edits