View Single Post
  #38 (permalink)  
Old 20-Oct-2005, 22:43
Roro Roro is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Japan
Posts: 120
First Language: default
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Roro is on a distinguished road
Default Re: passive participles

Quote:
Originally Posted by M56
all you've done regarding your "affectedness" suggestion is to offer it as a label. Could you try to elaborate on why you would use the term "affectedness"? Maybe then I'll have something to listen to..
Good morning, M56, yes, that's the point.

That is, I'm proposing the participle of {affectedness} or the Participle Two just as more appropriate labels, as you said.

The problem is: all of my arguments for it I've thought of are so ad hoc...!

...................................
By the way don't you know something about the grammaticalization process of 'have+p.p.' ? I've read somewhere (in Kurylowicz, if I remember correctly) that until some stage these sentences below mean roughly the same thing, that is , [2] doesn't have 'present perfect' meaning:

[1] He has the letter written.

[2] He has written the letter.

Have you ever come across upon some interesting papers or resources about this issue? If you have, please kindly let me know; I'll use it in order to reinforce my argument
...................................
Reply With Quote