[YG Conlang Archives] > [romanceconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Padraic Brown eskribiw: > --- John Cowan <jcowan@hidden.email> wrote: > > Isaac A. Penzev scripsit: > > > > > 2. Why do you use 2sn in <<que es in los > > cielos>>? Traditionally, 3sn is used > > > in such constructions. > > > > The Vulgate says "Pater noster qui es [not est] > > in caelis", > > It may also not be out of line to consider that > when the prayer was taught, it was taught as an > address to god. I.e., first person speaks to > second person. Only the 2s would make sense. In > English or Latin. See reply to Dr.Cowan :-)) But I didn't notice that the switch to indirect address is not made throughout the text, because it continues with "let Thy Name be hallowed"... > Presumably Greek as well, but I > don't have a Greek version to compare. As Dr.Cowan says, <<Note the total absence of a copula in "ho en tois ouranois".>> No wonder I made this silly mistake. The Hebrew form |avinu she bashamayim|, met in traditional Jewish prayers from Siddur (the Prayerbook) has no copular either... > Padraic. Yitzik, who is very sorry if he offended somebody with his mistake 0:-)