Re: [romconlang] Re: Natus

From: Adam Walker <carrajena@hidden.email>
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2004 21:05:05 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: [romconlang] Re: Natus
To: romconlang@yahoogroups.com

--- Nik Taylor <yonjuuni@hidden.email> wrote:
> Roger Mills wrote:
> > Span. nacer is entirely* regular-- pret. nacï¿½, pp.
> nacido
> > Ital. nascere has irreg. pret. nacqui,
> nascesti.... and pp. nato.  Of course
> > the pret. (= Lat. perfect) had to be created by
> analogy for this verb, since
> > it was passive in Lat.
> > --------------
> > *except 1st sg. pres. nazco
> 
> Strange.  How often would one need to use the first
> person singular
> *present* tense of "be born"?  :-)
> 

It could be useful for translating Dikens!

Adam

=====
Indjindrud edjuebu ul Ozias ad ul Jotam.  Indjindrud edjuebu ul Jotam ad ul Acaz.  Indjindrud edjuebu ul Acaz ad ul Ezecias.  Indjindrud edjuebu ul Ezecias ad ul Manases.  Indjindrud edjuebu ul Manases ad ul Amos.  Indjindrud edjuebu ul Amos ad ul Josias.    

Machu 1:9-10

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [romconlang] Re: Natus
  - From: Costentin Cornomorus <elemtilas@hidden.email>

References:
- Re: [romconlang] Re: Natus
  - From: Nik Taylor <yonjuuni@hidden.email>

Prev by Date: Re: [romconlang] Natus
Next by Date: Re: [romconlang] Re: Natus
Previous by thread: Re: [romconlang] Re: Natus
Next by thread: Re: [romconlang] Re: Natus
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread