Well I suppose that is theoretically possible, @louis - in that any shift in meaning is possible over time…I just can’t think of any obvious examples in the modern language. Someone mentioned troedig, didn’t they? But that usually means a convert, i.e. someone who has been turned, i.e. passive.
You certainly do get drift and overlap in participles in languages where there isn’t much morphology, it’s true. More clearly defined in a language like Russian, for example, which has bags of morphology and whole display cases of different endings for everything, and which, for example, has a distinct present passive participle. But English is more fluid simply because it’s vaguer in terms of morphology, and that (for example) is why we can say in English (even if the pedants routinely complain about it the newspaper letters pages - erroneously, of course) that ‘I was sat at my desk’. Perfectly correct English - it’s an (admittedly less usual) past participle ACTIVE. They do exist.
I could drone on for years about participles, couldn’t you?
Oh! Diolch! Wy’n dweud ‘Ond ydy e’ (but is it’!)
To @owainlurch Diolch.So ‘ond’ is not ‘but’ at all!! I shall still say it and think, ‘but is it’! Old dragons and new tricks do not mix well!!
Are there that many native Cornish speakers?? The revival goes well, in that case!!
I think almost anything is fine. I have heard that the derivation of some is from onid/oni (if … not, unless, except ) rather than ond. But everything is contracted, changed and altered and ends up sounding much the same, wherever it’s derived from. There are better and more knowledgeable people who chip into these levels of discussion than me.
I understood. I was, I thought, putting an amusing slant on it! I know full well that most folk of the group known as Celts (we will not go into the accuracy of that) are good at discussion! My grandfather, my father and I always had at least three opinions, sometimes more, on any subject!( Mmm… that was the one relation who, I think, lacked any Welsh blood. Maybe Dorset folk are Celts as well??)
Gosh you lot… I vaguely noticed that post about blinedig last week and got distracted from confirming it - and next time I look there have been like 87 posts about it!
Erm, what I was going to say was that the nice thing about it is that it gives you the flexibility to say things like ‘rhy flinedig’, ‘fwy blinedig’ ac ‘o’n i mor flinedig!’ (Apologies if that has been done to death in the previous 97 posts!)
That is very true @netmouse - and it is not only useful but obligatory, of course, in that - as you correctly imply, one cannot say * rhy wedi blino etc.
That’s what I’ve heard and read too, from more than source!!
(But just to make it clear that after having that confirmed by both Iestyn and Gareth King, I certainly couldn’t describe myself as in the comparatively “more knowledgeable” group!)
Yeah, “blinedig” is one of the most obvious examples, isn’t it. Means exactly the same, but just used in alternatives like that, when the form of the language means you have to. Mentioned a few times (because it’s commonly used) - (and certainly explained best by Gareth King) but certainly not done to death!
yes more or leas. i have plenty more to learn - seems obvious now you have corrected my multitude of errors I waz actually think meddwl and wrlte teimlo, I was just thinking. The ise of faint is something I have to overcome.
that was the one relation who, I think, lacked any Welsh blood. Maybe Dorset folk are Celts as well??)