Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!ncar!uchinews!ellis!deb5
From: deb5@ellis.uchicago.edu (Daniel von Brighoff)
Subject: Evolution of affirmative particles [was: Re: Greek nai
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: midway.uchicago.edu
Message-ID: <DpKvsu.85I@midway.uchicago.edu>
Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (News Administrator)
Reply-To: deb5@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: The University of Chicago
References: <rharmsen.1174.000E6818@knoware.nl> <rharmsen.1196.00174445@knoware.nl> <DpDJ13.GAz@midway.uchicago.edu> <31655ea6.14820841@news.nando.net>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1996 04:43:42 GMT
Lines: 32

In article <31655ea6.14820841@news.nando.net>,
D Gary Grady <dgary@nando.net> wrote:
>deb5@ellis.uchicago.edu (Daniel von Brighoff) wrote:
>
>>>BTW. Some languages DON'T have words for yes and no, Welsh is one I believe.
>>
>>Well, yes and no.  It would be more accurate to say that Welsh has no
>>single pair of words that invariably translate "yes" and "no".  The normal 
>>way to answer a yes-or-no question in the language is by repeating the verb.
>
>I believe this is usual in languages lacking the equivalent of "yes"
>and "no". Doesn't Chinese work this way, for instance?

Shia! [It is!]

>Also, if memory serves, Latin did not use "sic" for "yes" until fairly
>late. Given that it means "thus" it's not hard to see how it came to
>be an affirmative particle.

This would explain why the words for "yes" in the Romance languages are
not all cognate.  (Rumanian has even borrowed Slavic "da".)

>Surely some linguist has researched how words equivalent to "yes" have
>evolved. Can someone summarize or at least provide a reference?

I'd also be interested in seeing more on this subject.


-- 
	 Daniel "Da" von Brighoff    /\          Dilettanten
	(deb5@midway.uchicago.edu)  /__\         erhebt Euch
				   /____\      gegen die Kunst!
