[Multilingual Monday] And I am telling you ...

[aadroma]

I find command forms in various languages to be fascinating. In English, "Drive!", "Go!", "Fight!", etc., are all command forms but also identical to the present tense verb. Likewise, using "Don't" negates the above verbs -- "Don't drive!", "Don't go!", "Don't fight!", etc. But in many languages the command form is NOT this straightforward.

WHO

Comments

[muckefuck]

The relationship of the command form to the future can be interesting. Latin actually had a distinct future imperative, which I've only just discovered had become archaic by the Classical period, limited primarily to legal contexts. The motto of my high school was "ESTO VIR" which was translated as "Be a man!"[*] But actually esto is the future imperative; the literary ring it has is particularly appropriate for a formal motto. I've also seen suggestions that this form carries more of a connotation of continuation. That is, "Es vir!" could mean "Be a man [in this particular instance]!" whereas "Esto vir!" suggests "Be a man [from now on

[muckefuck]

A lot of analyses split 了 into a marker of perfective aspect and a "change of relevant state" marker. Its use with imperatives is generally considered a case of the latter. (I love to see people who claim that "Chinese is easy because there are no tenses" struggle with aspect and aktionsart in the language.)

[bearquest]

In Hebrew, "lo"/לא is also used for negative commands, such as in the עשרת הדיברות. Also "bal"/בל is used a verbal negation along with the much more common declinable particle "ain"/אין. In Finnish, surprisingly similar to Hebrew, there exists a special verb of negation that is conjugated according to person and number, e.g. en/I do not, ette/you do not, eivat/they do not, emme/we do not. These forms correspond roughly to איני/אינם/איננו/אינך-אינכם.

Languages are indeed fascinating. Thanks for another intriguing insight into the world of linguistics!

[aadroma]

I think in the case of עשרת הדיברות and other Biblical texts the use of לא here indicates the future and not necessarily the command (though the implication of a command is there!), hence the future translation into other languages. In modern Hebrew one can never make a negative imperative statement with לא.

Trends in modern Spanish

[gorkabear]

Currently most youngsters make the following mistake in Spanish, which is quite severe from a grammatical standpoint. Let's take the correct form of a simple imperative verb, such as "comer"

Come (tú)
Coma (usted)
Comamos (nosotros)
Comed (vosotros)
Coman (ustedes)

The imperative form for vosotros is usually messed with the infinitive, so most people now actually say "Comer"

This is quite severe as the negative imperative is made with the present subjuntive

No comas
No coma
No comamos
No comáis
No coman

Yet people are saying "¡No comer!"

Quite remarkably, the negative imperative in Italian is with the infintive. "Non comere" means "Don't eat"

Re: Trends in modern Spanish

[gorkabear]

Ouch, "non mangiare", sorry.

Re: Trends in modern Spanish

[progbear]

I see that a lot in “bilingual” signs in the States. ¡No fumar! where ¡No fumen! would technically be more correct.

Another way of negating the imperative in English is the “Stop ___ing” construction, like the annoyingly didactic “STOP DRIVING!” exhortations one sees all over Berkeley.

Re: Trends in modern Spanish

[gorkabear]

Hum, that way of stating negative orders is kind of incorrect in Spanish. Instead of saying "No fumar", the sign should say "Prohibido fumar". However, I must say that I double checked the RAE site (Royal Academy of Spanish language, the authority that now works with all Latinamerican countries to define a standard) and it seems that this sign could be correct

How about the "generic" imperative?

[gorkabear]

One thing we have solved quite elegantly in Catalan (at least from my point of view) and is now a direct influence from French is how the "generic imperative" is made. That is, when you find instructions printed in signs. For instance, on a train, when you read instructions such as "Press the button to open the door" and "Do not lean on doors"

We have up to 3 respect levels in Catalan (tu, vostè, vós) so the order could be "Prem el botó", "Premi el botó" and "Premeu el botó" or you could use the plural (vosaltres, vostès): "Premeu el botó" and "Premin el botó"

The solution here was using the "vosaltres/vos" form, which is both formal and informal (since we use no pronouns with most verbal forms). So what you find is "Premeu el botó" and "No us recolzeu sobre les portes".

[muckefuck]

In German, a formal "generic" imperative can be expressed with the infinitive, e.g. "Den Knopf drucken". (The standard formal imperative would be "Drucken Sie den Knopf!") I'm not sure how this originated, but it's very widespread. It's the standard phrasing for giving directions in cookbooks, for example.

[gorkabear]

Guess what, I double checked for Spanish and the RAE states that for impersonal instructions (rather than orders), the infinitive can be used. This sounds quite like that German usage for recipes and the like...