01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
2026 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2025 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2024 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2023 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2022 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2021 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2020 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2019 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2018 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2017 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2016 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2015 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2014 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2013 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2012 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2011 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2010 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2009 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
ʸȯ˴ؤ벾ϤĤ뤬¸ǸŤʸƤݥߥϤڤ췲ǴڷʸεǤϤʤȤ⤬롥ݥߥʸˤ־ɼפ̤ȤܤǴڤΥޤʸθĤǤϤʤȤʸˡ٤路 (41--42) ⡤βƤ褦Ǥ롥
4ǯ3000ǯˡݥߥʥꥷ mesos ֿˡסpotamos סˤȤ̿̾ΤȤȤʤäĤꥹȥ桼եƥȤˤϤޤ줿ʸʸо줹롥ʸ˲ŪȯĤΤ⤽αƶƤʸȯǤ롥ʸνиϾʤȤѰۤʤĤΰҤ˷ӤĤ롥ԲŪҡϡΰҤǤ롥Ȥ⤫̿ηϡʥɡˤȤȤϡ̿ηϤͭ륰롼פ䶦ƱΤ¸ߤȷդޤ̿ηϤˤäǽ¸ߤȤĤʤ롥ʸ߽ФƱΤϡΤˤȡ1928ǯʹߤȯפȤʤäƤ桼եƥκߤϥݥߥ˰֤륦륯ʺǤϥ륫ˤȤ̾ĮΥä̱ǤäʸεǽϡθϤη֡Ĥޤ귡Ф줿ޤϻΤ֤ĤƤ뤪Ӥ־ɼסά͡礭α߿ܡ̡̡Ф褦ξɼ㤨«κݤݾڤΰ̣ɽ魯뤷ȤäѤƤƬӤϤΤ˹դ硤Ƭξɼ⤷ϤƬǾħŪɽ魯ʣξɼǴڤεΤΤǤ롥
줫餳Ǵڶ̤ΤƤˤĤƵܤ뤳ȤפĤ褦줬줿Ǵڶ̤οƤߤʬ뤳ȤܤȤȤǡ̵̤ʤȤȤϤ餯ʤä褦ʸκϤƤǤäĤޤ꽸ġ㤨зӤοˤɼοˡοܥ饤ƵȤȤǤ롥
Ǵھɼʸȯϡųؼ Schmandt-Besserat ƾΤǤꡤʸε˴ؤ뽾ε˰ФꤸΤȤơߤǤ⤭ƽפʸȤʤäƤ롥ˤĤƤϡεǼ夲롥
ʲˡݥߥ濴ȤϿޤ Comrie et al. (164) ƸƤ

륤 ʸ Ρ ʸˡ١Ͻн˼1998ǯ
Schmandt-Besserat, Denise. "The Earliest Precursor of Writing." Scientific American 238 (1978): 50--59.
Comrie, Bernard, Stephen Matthews, and Maria Polinsky, eds. The Atlas of Languages. Rev. ed. New York: Facts on File, 2003.
Ѹ yogh /joʊk, jɔux/ ȸƤФ <ȝ> ʸѤƤȤˤĤƤϡ#1914. <g> ֤ ([2014-07-24-1]) Ǽ夲Ѹ <g> ʸμդ˴ؤŪˤʣ yogh ʸŪʤäƹͤƤߤ
ޤפʤȤϡ<ȝ> ϴŪˤѸˤѤ줿ʸ (grapheme) ФƾΤǤȤȤűѸǤ⡤ȤƤϤѤʤʸѤƤΤؤ yogh ȾΤ뤳ȤϤʤűѸΤϡޤ <g> Τˤ flat-headed gˤȸƤ֤٤Ǥ롥
λ⤦褦Ѹ <g> űѸʸϡhalf-uncial Τ饢ɽΤͳä <<Ӡ>> λ (flat-headed g) äƤꡤб벻Ǥ [g, j, ɣ] ǤäΥޥФѸȡAnglo-French ֻαƶΤȤǡ<g> /ʤ/ βˤб褦ˤʤꡤʸ <g> εǽ٤ϹޤäѸˤĤʤ round-headed g ϡΤͳ褷ΤΥޥ͢뤳ȤˤꡤѸνˤƤ夷Ƥǡ<g> εǽ¿äȤưŤ⤢äΤۤʤΤ°뿷 round-headed g (<<g>>) ȸŻ flat-headed g (<<Ӡ>>) ǽʬ뤳ȤˤʤäΤǤ롥Ԥϥեˤʤä [g, ʤ] βбԤϸűѸͳ [j, x, ɣ] ɽ魯褦ˤʤäȤǡԤҤΤ褦˸ flat-headed ǤäƬݤؿʲѸޤǤˤϡ3פ˻ <<ȝ>> ˤʤäƤȤƤϸűѸ̤롤ƬδݤޤäѸʸؤ yogh ȸƤ֤ΤǤ롥Τ褦ˤơ<g> <ȝ> ȤϡѸδ֡ΰۤʤ2ĤʸǤȤơ줾̳̤
䤬 <ȝ> ϡ줬ɽ路Ƥ [j], [x], [ɣ] ơ <y>, <gh>, <w> ֤褦ˤʤ˵ڤӡषƤäѸʸ <g> μդޤȤСűѸ1äΤѸ2ʬθƤ1äơ˻ȤȤǤ롥
ʾ塤 (128--30) ȤƼɮ˴Ϣơ#447. Dalziel, MacKenzie, Menzies <z> ([2010-07-18-1])#1651. j g ([2013-11-03-1])#1824. <C> <G> ʬ ([2014-04-25-1]) ⻲ȡ
סرѸ쥢ե٥åȯãˡʸȲ١ʸҡ1970ǯ
ƣ (37--39) ˽äơűѸμפ첻ˤѸطѾ줿礷褦ѲΡʤäΡѸǿΤʤ͡Ǥ롥ºݤˤˤäƻϰۤʤ뤬绨ĤˤäǥȤƤ롥
| űѸ | Ѹ | ѲΥ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | [i] biddan 'bid' | [i] bidde(n) | ̵Ѳ |
| 2 | [u] sunu 'sun', cuman 'come' | [u] sone, come(n) | ̵Ѳ |
| 3 | [o] hors 'horse' | [o] hors | ̵Ѳ |
| 4 | [iː] wīf 'woman' | [iː] wīf | ̵Ѳ |
| 5 | [eː] fēt 'feet' | [eː] fēt | ̵Ѳ |
| 6 | [uː] hūs 'house' | [uː] hūs/hous | ̵Ѳ |
| 7 | [oː] gōd 'good' | [oː] gōd | ̵Ѳ |
| 8 | [y] pytt 'pit' | [i] pit | ???????????? |
| 9 | [ɑ] a. catt 'cat' | IJ [a]ː cat | 岽 |
| b. nama | [aː]ː nāme | 岽Ĺ | |
| 10 | [æ] a. bæc 'back' | IJ [a]ː bak | 岽 |
| b. æcer 'acre' | [aː]ː āker | 岽Ĺ | |
| 11 | [e] a. settan 'set' | IJ [e]ː sette(n) | ̵Ѳ |
| b. mete 'meat' | [ɛː]ː mēte | 夲Ĺ | |
| 12 | [o] col 'coal' | [oː]ː cōle | Ĺ |
| 13 | [yː] hȳdan 'hide' | [iː] hīde(n) | ???????????? |
| 14 | [æː] a. dǣd 'deed' | [eː] dēd | ???? |
| b. sǣ 'sea', dǣl 'deal' | [ɛː] sē, dēl | 夲2ʡ | |
| 15 | [ɑː] stān 'stone', hām 'home' | [ɔː] stōn, hōm | ???? |
| 16 | [io] hiora 'their' | [i] hire | ñ첻 |
| 17 | [iːo] līoht 'light' | [iː] līht | Ĺ첻 |
| 18 | [ie] giefan 'give', ieldra 'elder' | [i] yiven, ylder | ñ첻 |
| 19 | [iːe] hīeran 'hear' | [iː] hīre/hūre | Ĺ첻 |
| 20 | [eo] heorte 'heart' | [e] herte | ñ첻 |
| 21 | [eːo] dēop 'deep' | [eː] dēp | Ĺ첻 |
| 22 | [ɛɑ] hearm 'harm' | [a] harm | ñ첻 |
| 23 | [ɛːɑ] drēam 'dream' | [ɛː] drēm | Ĺ첻 |
| 24 | [iː+w] tīwesdæg | [iu] tiwesday | 첻ܻҲ2첻 |
| 25 | [æ+j] dæg | [ai] dai | 첻ܻҲ2첻 |
| 26 | [eːo+w] cnēow | [eu] knew | 첻ܻҲ2첻 |
| 27 | [ɑ+w] clawu | [au] clawe | 첻ܻҲ2첻 |
| 28 | [aː+w] cnāwan | [ou] knowe(n) | 첻ܻҲ2첻 |
| 29 | --- | [oi] vois (OF) | ťե줫μ |
ɸ2ĤνŪϡǯǧθؤοŸȤȤˡ2ĤǧΤˡȤư褦ˤʤäƤ2ĤϤФ椵뤬metaphor 2 (similarity) ˴Ťmetonymy 2 (contiguity) ˴ŤȤΤŪˤʤǤ롥Lakoff and Johnson (36) ϡξԤεǽŪʺۤˤܤƤ롥
Metaphor and metonymy are different kinds of processes. Metaphor is principally a way of conceiving of one thing in terms of another, and its primary function is understanding. Metonymy, on the other hand, has primarily a referential function, that is, it allows us to use one entity to stand for another.
ʤۤɡmetaphor ˤ metonymy ˤ⡤λˤҤͤäȤǽȡؼоݤλѤäΤˤȤǽξˤϰ㤤ʤ줾Υȥåμ礿뵡ǽȤСmetaphor ˴طۤǡmetonymy ϻؼ˴طۤ
metonymy λؼǽˤĤƸϡmetonymy Ѥʤ̾ɽˤؼȰۤʤꡤؼоݤΤɤ¦̤ˤȤ櫓ܤĤĻؼ뤫Ȥ־פξޤޤƤ뤳ȤǤ롥Lakoff and Johnson (36) ƤС"The Times hasn't arrived at the press conference yet." ˤơ"The Times" λؼоݤϡƱ̾οʹΤȤǤʤСʹҤΤΤΤȤǤʤʹҤɽƻԤǤ롥ˤƻԤ̾Ƥ⡤ؼоݤѤ餺ʸỤ̄Ѥʤ metonymy Ѥ "The Times" ɽ뤳ȤˤäơؼоݤƻԤƱʹҤɽԤǤǤԤǤȤȤƤΤǤ롥ľ̾ѤƤޤСξʤLakoff and Johnson (37) ۩
[Metonymy] allows us to focus more specifically on certain aspects of what is being referred to.
metaphor metonymy ˤĤƤϡ#2187. ΰ̣եǤ ([2015-04-23-1])#2406. metonymy ([2015-11-28-1])#2196. ޥåȤγˤ metaphor metonymy Ʊ ([2015-05-02-1]) ⻲Ȥ줿
Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago and London: U of Chicago P, 1980.
ȤȤ˰Ѥȯ줿ȤϡñʤˤζäѾγȤơطʤˤϼװʤɬˤϰ㤤ʤװξꡤλȯȤȤϤ褽ȹͤ줽 (142) ϡְѤʸ (pp. 129--47) Τʤǡյװ1ĤȤƴΤʸŪΤǤϤʤȽҤ٤Ƥ롥ˤĤƤϿŤ˸Ƥ;Ϥ뤬ε⤷Τǡʲ˺ƸƤߤ롥
ñɽ魯ڤΥ줿ʸ椫ʸȤͤȺǤӤĤפΤǤäޤ夫餢äϤܤȤ뤿ʤɤ顤ϼ˻פĤ줿ΤǤϤʤȤͤ롥άʣʲʸǤ뤫餳ʤưȤͤΤǤϤޤȤȤȡե٥åʸ̤ƫҾ˹िˤФФʸȤƻȤƤΤФơѥԥ륹顦ɤ˽褦ˤʤȡĤŤϢƤȤȤ̸ͤά͡
ϡγ¿μबɬפʤˡΤ⡤֤Τ֤롤äơˤŬʤΤǤϤʤȤռˤȤäȿǤ롥ѤäѤǤޤСष֤Ȥ뤳ȤΥåȤϷפΤʤȤ⤤롥ǰˤƤ⡤ϰۤʤʤ
Τ褦˹ͤȡȰϡ̤˸ƤɤΤ⤷ʤ (187) ϡ̤ʸϡʸء (pp. 165--87) ΤʤǡդĿμʤѤƤܤΰʸ˿ĤġΤ褦ӤǤΰŪʴվоݤȤƤν֤¿ʸƤ롥ʸˤĤƤϡ#2408. ץʸˤߤѰۤȻΤѲ ([2015-11-30-1])#2412. ʸϡϡ ([2015-12-04-1]) ⻲Ȥ줿
ʸסʸؤΤΤߡ١罤ۡ1977ǯ
ʸˤ˴ؤƵǼ褦ˡ¿ʸԤϡȥꥨʸʥץʸܸʸե٥åȡˤδ֤ľܤΤĤʤϤʤȤߤƤ (cf. #1822. ʸη ([2014-04-23-1])#1853. ʸη (2) ([2014-05-24-1])#2398. ʸη (3) ([2015-11-20-1])) ȯˤĤƤϤޤʶȤƤ뤬ʸεˤĤƤ¿ȯ (polygenesis) ȤƤȤäƤ褤ϴȥꥨʸִŪˡ״طǽޤǤӽƤΤǤϤʤȲ᤹뤳ȤǤ롥Τ褦˴ᤵ줿طȤȤǤСξԤõȤԤϤޤǤ⾯ʤ餺뤫⤷ʤºݡ (58--59) ϡִȥꥨʸפꤹ (49--62) ǡε˾굤Ǥ롥
ɮԤȤƤϿʸˤΤˡʸؤΰջ֤Ȥ餫ŪϤߤ¿δϢΤȤ˸줿ǤȤͤꤹĤϤʤͤϸʸؼIJפˤäɽƤΤǤ롥άפϡʸϽФˤϡʸܿ˴Ťɷ (stimulus)פäΤǤϤʤȹͤ롥ĤޤʸΤΤȤäȹ⤤ǤŤäΤǤȤ롥פϤϿؼALС (Kroeber) Ρֻɷ (Stimulus Diffusion)פȤͤˤΤǤꡤ༫Ȥιͤܤʤ饯СιͤäƤ뤳ȤǧƤ롥ɮԤȤƤϡ⤷ʸȥꥨȷʸ˲餫ΤĤʤ꤬ȤС¾ʸΤˤĤʤΤΤȯǤǤޤդ¾ʸΤˤĤʤ꤬ǧǤСʸǤΤĤʤ⤢ꤦ뤳ȤȤƸڤͤ뤳Ȥȹͤ롥
ʸؤΰջ֡פȤɽŪǤ롥֤Ϥ뤬ǯǯˤơΤ˶̤ơʤ餯Ϣơˡʸؤΰջ֡פƤȤΤϡޥåʶϤ뤬ˤ٤ʤ˴٤ǤϤʤ褦˻פ롥
Ǥϡʸؤΰջ֤ȤϲϡʸԤߤȤäƤߤ٤ɬ˶줿ȤȤϤʸɤ褽ƱˡƱŪкŪŪʾˤơȤƤޤäԻĤϤʤʸθߤθήΤʤʸȯˤĤʤ륤ԥ졼ޤäȤȤϡʬˤ롥
ʸסʸؤΤΤߡ١罤ۡ1977ǯ
ޥɤν̱²5˥֥ƥؿάаޤˤĤƤϡ˳ؤųؤˤ͡ĴȸڤԤʤƤε1ĤȤȤǵ褦ȻפѸ˳路 Gramley (14--15) "The Germanic migrations" ꤹǡͤ "push-factors" ˤꡤͤ "pull-factors" ˤ֥ƥؤäƤȤҲ𤷤Ƥ롥ʲ˰Ѥ롥
In ancient times the peoples of Europe periodically moved from their homelands to new territories. Just why they migrated is a matter of conjecture and surely differed from case to case . . . . The major reason mooted is overpopulation, which led smaller groupings (rarely if ever a whole people) to move off to find sufficient land to settle on. On occasion pressure came from outside invaders such as the Huns, who pushed various peoples further to the west and caused them to try to find lands in the Roman Empire. Drought or other natural catastrophes might also have forced groups to pull up stakes and look for (literally) greener pastures. All of these points might be understood collectively as push-factors. The migration of the Angles to Kent was probably such a case since it seems that whole clans moved. . . . Pull factors . . . are also often seen as motivation for migration. Raids by bands of young warriors, perhaps younger sons without land, seem to have been quite frequent. While many of them were just that, raids, from which the men returned home with booty of all sorts, on other occasions, they settled in the areas invaded and, after removing the male competitors they had defeated, took the indigenous women as wives. This may apply to the Saxons, whose pattern of settlement in the English Midlands with small and equal allotments suggests a well-regulated system of distributing spoils. Furthermore, since the Saxons practiced primogeniture, smaller allotments would suffice, while the larger ones in Kent suggest more the Angles' system of gavelkind . . . . / Other pull-factors may be found in the changing structure of Germanic society under the influence of Roman expansion and Roman culture. The Roman Empire represented a high standard of living with well-established associations of power and prestige. In the case of England, even after the withdrawal of the Roman legionnaires there would have been no abrupt change.
ʤߤ˾嵭ȤƤ褦ˡGramley (17) ϥȤä礿뿯άԤϡŪʥ塼ȿͤȤϡषͤǤȤѤƤ롥
ʤˤС449ǯ Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Frisians ν̱²֥ƥ˿ȤˤʤäƤ뤬ųŪʾڵˤСޥ̱²ϤΩ5Ƭˤϳμ¤˥֥ƥ˵サƤGramley (16) ϡ"Pre-Conquest Germanic cemeteries" ꤹάϿޤʲΤ褦ͿƤ롥

ܵǰäƤȴϢơGramley αѸ˳ѥ˥ꡤChapter 1: The Origins of English (PDF) (p. 23) ɲŪʲ⤬ΤǡȤ줿ޤܥ֥椫#33. 塼ȿͤ̾Τˡ ([2009-05-31-1])#389. Angles, Saxons, and Jutes θϤȰܽ ([2010-05-21-1])#1013. ͤϤɤ֥ƥϤä ([2012-02-04-1])#2353. ʤͤϥɤΤ ([2015-10-06-1]) εȡ
Gramley, Stephan. The History of English: An Introduction. Abingdon: Routledge, 2012.
#2490. λʸhave + ʬפεȯã ([2016-02-20-1]) ǿ줿褦ˡѸ˴λʸŪ˳Ω⡤ǽŪˤϲȤʬϽѸޤǤۤΤʷǸʤäξڵˡˤϲλؼʶˤȴλ㤬ʤ餺ʸڤ롥ηˤĤơMustanoja (504) Ѥ褦
In ME and early Mod. E the functional distinction between the preterite and the compound tenses of the past is not, however, nearly so clear-cut as it is today, and the perfect, for example, may occur in conjunction with adverbs of past time: --- and homward he shal tellen othere two [tales], Of aventures that whilom han bifalle (Ch. CT A Prol. 795).
16--17ˤʤȤξѲѸΤ褦˴λȲʶˤζʤʤäƤեɥĸʤɶ٤ν줬Ʊͤʣñɽ魯ΤݻƤΤоŪˡѸǤϤλ˴λȲ֡ǽȤΤ˶̤褦ˤʤäΤǤ롥ʤѸˤˤƤϡΤ褦ʶ̤ΤơʤȤ櫓λΤդϡʸˡŪΩ줫 "present perfect puzzle" ȸƤФƤ롥
ѸȶٽӤ Yanagi ˤСhave ư V-to-T movement ʸŤѸ졤ե졤ɥĸ졤ɸʤɡˤˤĤƤϲʬʿԤưư뤬ǤʤʸѸΦǥʥˤˤĤƤϲʬưʤơγƹŪʰư̵ͭ3 (Event Point, Speech Point, Reference Point) ߴطϢưƤꡤǽŪ˲˶Ťλ˶ŤꤹȤV-to-T movement ˤĤƤϡ̾ۤʤ졤¼ŪˤۤƱݤˤĤưä#1670. ˡưȯã V-to-I movement ([2013-11-22-1]) ȤƤΰ츫ƤŪʸݤȤǽ̩ܤ˴ϢƤǽȤȤϡ¤˶̣Ȥ櫓פϡV-to-T movement äȤȡɽ魯ȴλζʤʤϤ16礹뤳ȤǤ롥
Yanagi η (96) Ѥ褦
Here it has been argued that the obsolescence of the present perfect puzzle in the history of English can be attributed to the loss of overt verb movement by using the following assumptions: (a) In a language with independent V-to-T movement, perfect participles can move overtly; (b) In a language without independent V-to-T movement, perfect participles cannot move overtly. In addition, the viability of the present analysis was further supported by applying it to modern Germanic and Romance languages. As a theoretical contribution, it is semantically motivated.
Mustanoja, T. F. A Middle English Syntax. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique, 1960.
Yanagi, Tomohiro. "A Syntactic Approach to the Present Perfect Puzzle in the History of English." ضѸ츦١20桤2004ǯ73--103.
#2473. եˤߤ20ˡλ ([2016-02-03-1])#2474. ˤθס ([2016-02-04-1])#2477. Ѹˤߤ20ˡλ ([2016-02-07-1]) ǡեȱѸʤɤεˡˤĤƹͤϡεǤ⾯줿ե20ˡεˤ˴ؤǤ롥
եǤϡ10 (dix), 20 (vingt), 30 (trente), 40 (quarante), 50 (cinquante), 60 (soixante) ޤǤϳơΩ֤70 soixante-dix (60+10)80 quatre-vingts (4x20)90 quatre-vingt-dix (4x20+10) Ȥ䤳Ǥ롥ޤ6179ޤǤü8199ޤǤüϡ㤨79 soixante-dix-neuf (60+10+9) 99 quatre-vingt-dix-neuf (80+10+9) Τ褦ˡؤ䤳üˤ衤80ɽ魯ɽˤ衤ظ20ñ̤Ȥͤʤ20ˡǤȤȤˤʤ롥եοηϤϡ10ˡ20ˡκߤȤߤʤȤǤ
嵭ϤޤǸɸեˤηϤεҤǤäơŪ˸ꤷƤ櫓ǤϤʤߤǤեѼϤаۤʤ뵭ˡ롥ޤˤ֤ȡ842ǯΡإȥ饹֡٤˻ϤޤǽΥե줫δ֡Ǥ20ˡ˴ŤˡѤƤ褦12ˤϡquatre-vins (80) 줿̥եΥǤ dis huit vins (360) ʤɤ礭ʿˤ20ˡѤƤ롥ǡƥͳ褹10ˡѤ setante, septante (70); oitante, uitante, octante (80); nonante (90) ʻѤƤȤդɬפǤ롥ʻѾ֤ϡ1539ǯΡ֥졼ᥳȥļװʹ߾ƤäλɬӤΤǤϤʤäԤδ֤ǵϤä褦17ˤϾQŪˤϼʤΤȻפ줽 septante, octante, nonante ϼΤƤ졤ԤΤΤˤۤ夤
ʩΥå졤٥륮Υե졤ΥեʤɼդѼǤϡΤ quatre-vingts Ѥ줿ΤΡ10ˡ˴Ť septante nonante soixante-dix quatre-vingt-dix ФƾɸŪʵˡȤ夷Ƥ롥ѼǤ septante, octante, nonante λѤˤĤơ (28) Douzat ζ̣ȯȤƼʸƤ롥֤οϥեΥեϰ衤٥륮Τ褦ʡäȤƥ첽졤δؿƩκǤ⾯ʤϰˤ夷Ƥʤ
ơե˸20ˡεˡΤ⤽εˤĤƤϤɤեˤΤۤܽᤫڤΤǤ뤫顤λ̤ʤФʤʤ (27) ϡХ졤֥ȥ졤ǥޡ20ˡεˡѻ뤳ȤҤ٤ǡΤ褦˵Ƥ롥
Τ褦ˤߤƤȡ20ˡϥեͭΤΤǤϤʤ衼åѤ˺ǤĤ븽ݤǤ뤳Ȥ狼롥ȤǤĶˤäơĸΥƥˤϤʤ20ˡեϤɤȤ줿Τquatre-vingts soixante-dix ϡȥ֥륯˥åפ12˽ФȤƤΤǤ뤬ºݤˤϤ꤫ʤˤΤܤäƤϤǤ롥εˤĤơؼԤΰոϤۤܰפƤ롥ͤꥢϤ˿ν̱²ȿͤ⤿餷ΤȤǤ롥Ĥ²ʬƤ̱²ˤϡΤ20ˡѤƤ²⤤ä˥륺ΥȿͤˤĤƤϡ˸ŤڤˤäƳǧƤȤΥꥢˤȿͤ˴ؤϻĤäƤʤ椨եͤǤ륬ޥͤ˥ȿͤ줬äȤڤ뤳ȤϺΤȤԲǽʤΤǤ롥ȵʳˤϡޥʸؼԤȤΤƤե G. Rohlfs ˤΥޥ⤬롥ȸƤФ줿Υޥͤϡ800ǯʩ˽פϤθϤϥǥʥȥǥޡǤäϡ911ǯ˥3Ȥδ֤Ǹ路ˤäơߥΥޥǥȸƤФƤϰ꽻Marcel Cohen ˤСΥޥǥΥɥĮ Bayeux ˤϡ12ޤǥǥޡ줬ĤäƤȤ꽻ΥΥޥͤϡ1066ǯ˥ꥹ˹ΤǤ뤬Ʊΰϥꥢȥꥢ˸饻ͤ뤷ƤˤΥޥߤߤꥢ䥷ꥢ20ˡߤ뤳ȤʸˡȤϻŦƤ롥ե20ˡɤ褿ˤĤơ⡤ΥޥΤɤȤˤ衤ϥեˤΤܤ뤳ȤǤꡤڤϺʤ褦Ǥ롥
֥եοˤĤơסʽصסʸϡˡ271995ǯ19--32ǡ
ɸϡѸǤϤ褯Τ줿ʬ (reanalysis) Ȥơޤʸˡ (grammaticalisation) ȤƼ夲Ƥʲ (110--17) ˽äơʽŪʵҤܤ
űѸǤϡѸ They had their enclosure closed. have + Ū + ʬפιʸ¸ߤ (þā hīe tō Ðǣm ġemǣre cōmon . . ., þā hæfdon hīe hiera clūsan belocene [Or, ed. Sweet 112/34]) ιʸΰ̣ϸȰۤʤ餺֡Ūˤʲʬˤɽ魯֤ȤƤġפۤɤǤꡤŪȲʬŪỤ̄Ū̩ܤʴطˤäξڵˡʬŪʤ˰פƶȼäƤʾǤϡñгʡˡʳǤϡä˿δްդϤäƤʤä
8ޤǤˡŪѰۤƤŪȲʬΰ֤žhave + ʬ + ŪʸоǤ롥θϤФ餯¸ƤΤΡϸѸΤ褦 They had closed their enclosure. They had their enclosure closed. ΰ̣Ωɽ魯ΤǤɬʤä˿have + ʬ + Ūפ¿Ѥ褦ˤʤꡤޤ¾ưβʬ˸¤ƤΤưʤѰưʳˤβʬˤޤdzȤʤɤơֲʬŪפΤĤʤhave + ʬפΤĤʤ꤬ռ褦ˤʤä
ѸȡʬŪδطŪʰפɸʤʤꡤhave + ʬפβʣŪʽҸưȤª˻äʳǡhave + ʬפϸѸˤĤʤ칽ʸȤƳΩȤäƤ褤̣ŪˤСޤΤ˶̤뿷꤬줿櫓ǤϤʤäºݡwhilom long ago ʤɲɽ魯ȸߴλʸ뤳Ȥϡʹ Shakespeare դޤ³ƤꡤѸθߴλˤߤָߤȤδͿפȤħΩƤȤΤ16ʹߤǤ롥
ιʸεȯãʸˡȤŪ˵ҤȼΤ褦ˤʤݺ, p. 14 οޤͤˤˡ
OE ME ModE
have + NP + pp -----> have + pp + NP -----> have + pp + NP ===> λ
ͭư ư ư

ʸ (ogham) ϡ衤륺롤ޥ硤ƥåȥɤΰ4ʹ˻ޤѤ줿20ʸʤ륢ե٥åʸηϤ1Ǥ롥ȥꥢʸʤ뤤ϥޥե٥åȡˤꥢͤμͳƤϤΥȸüԤäѷΤ餷ɤإꥹȶŤȼΥȡꥹȶȯã뤢ˤѤ³줿Ūˤϥ롼ʸ (runic) Ȥⲿ餫δطȤƤʡ#1849. ե٥åȤηޡ ([2014-05-20-1]) ʤɤȤ줿ˡʸȤ̾ϡ롼ʸäȤ륲ޥǥ (Odin) 륢ɿ (Ogma) ͳ褷λͺۤοͰƼԤǤƤ롥ʸǽɽƤϥȸΤۤԥȸ (Pictish) ⤢褦ΤƤ375ʾäΤ300ۤɤϥɤϤǸĤäƤ롥
ʸλСʤƸ¸Ƥʤ餯ںˤγѤ˹ߤĤ줿ñʴŪʼǤ롥ûʸϤˤ̺ĹɬפȤʤ뤿ᡤĹʸϽƤʤñ㤵ϤʸϵǤޤǻȤƤʸΤʤǡäȤ̯ʤΡ (207) ɾ֤ʸϡˤʤäƤĤ줿⡼륹ȤΰŹԤäȤäƤ褤褦˻פ (209) ȽҤ٤Ƥ (cf. #1805. Morse code ([2014-04-06-1]))
ʸνˤĤƤϽĤ˲͡뤬Encylopædia Britannica 1997 Ǥ "In many cases the ogham inscriptions run upward." ȤڤƤꡤ#2483. (4) ([2016-02-13-1]) ȴϢƶ̣
Comrie et al. (188) ꡤΥץ

Comrie et al. (189) ˤϡʸεˤĤưʲΤ褦ä
The origin of the script is uncertain. Some scholars have speculated that Ogham is based upon a secret finger-language of the Druidic priests, citing a medieval Irish manuscript in which such a finger-code is described. It has also been proposed that the script developed under the influence of the Latin or Greek alphabets and the Germanic runes .
ۤ˥ʸΥץϡOmniglot: Writing Systems & Language of the World Ogham alphabet ˤܤΤȡ
ʸסزɡʸ١˼1999
Comrie, Bernard, Stephen Matthews, and Maria Polinsky, eds. The Atlas of Languages. Rev. ed. New York: Facts on File, 2003.
Baugh and Cable αѸ˳6ǤˤĤơ#2089. Baugh and Cable αѸ˳ܼ ([2015-01-15-1]) ȡ#2182. Baugh and Cable αѸ6ǡ ([2015-04-18-1]) Ǵñ˿줿ɤߴ줿ǤѹƤʬƳ¿ΤΡ̻ˤȳ̻ˤΥХäѸ˵Ҥˤϡ1930ǯνǰ衤⤷餤ѤäƤʤʸ p. xvi ˽Ǥμ1ѤƤ롥
The present book, intended primarily for college students, aims to present the historical development of English in such a way as to preserve a proper balance between what may be called internal history---sounds and inflections---and external history---the political, social, and intellectual forces that have determined the course of that development at different periods. The writer is convinced that the soundest basis for an understanding of present-day English and for an enlightened attitude towards questions affecting the language today is a knowledge of the path which it has pursued in becoming what it is. For this reason equal attention has been paid to its earlier and its later stages.
ޤʸƬ1 "The History of the English Language as a Cultural Subject" ꤵƤ롥pp. 1--2 ˤ褦ˡ
The history of a language is intimately bound up with the history of the peoples who speak it. The purpose of this book, then, is to treat the history of English not only as being of interest to the specialized student but also as a cultural subject within the view of all educated people, while including enough references to technical matters to make clear the scientific principles involved in its evolution.
ԤˤȤäơѸˡʸˡˤȤضβܤϡܤǤ⤢궵ܲܤǤ⤢Τ伫Ȥ⡤Ԥˤ⤯äơߤΥƥȤܽѸˤ˰ˤȤäƤϡ̤ܽƤäŪܤʤ顤ʸŪܤƤ餤ȤʤˤȤäƤϡʸŪܤȤƳؤǤ餦ǤʤŪʸ⽤Ƥ餤
Baugh, Albert C. and Thomas Cable. A History of the English Language. 6th ed. London: Routledge, 2013.
#1072. ѸϸȤäˤƤ櫓ǤϤʤ ([2012-04-03-1])#1082. ʤѸȤʤä (1) ([2012-04-13-1])#1083. ʤѸȤʤä (2) ([2012-04-14-1])#1607. Ѹ춵Ū¦̡ ([2013-09-20-1])#1788. Ķ̱²νиȳ˴Ϳװ ([2014-03-20-1]) ǡʹߤαѸΡפϡŪħˤΤǤϰڤʤҤȤ˸쳰ŪʸʤҲŪŪкŪŪŪˤͥۤ椨ȤȤĥƤѸ˸¤餺ɤθ̸⡤νʤͤʤϡŪˤǤϤʤҲŪ˷褻롥Baugh and Cable (3--4) ΤȤͺۤƤΤǡäꤽΤޤްѤ
4. The Importance of a Language. It is natural for people to view their own first language as having intrinsic advantages over languages that are foreign to them. However, a scientific approach to linguistic study combined with a consideration of history reminds us that no language acquires importance because of what are assumed to be purely internal advantages. Languages become important because of events that shape the balance of power among nations. These political, economic, technological, and military events may or may not reflect favorably, in a moral sense, on the peoples and states that are the participants; certainly, different parties to those events will have different interpretations of what is admirable or not. It is clear, however, that the language of a powerful nation will acquire importance as a direct reflection of political, economic, technological, and military strength; so also will the arts and sciences expressed in that language have advantages, including the opportunities for propagation. The spread of arts and sciences through the medium of a particular language in turn reinforces the prestige of that language. Internal deficits such as an inadequate vocabulary for the requirements at hand need not restrict the spread of a language. It is normal for a language to acquire through various means, including borrowing from other languages, the words that it needs. Thus, any language among the 6,000 languages of the world could have attained the position of importance that the half-dozen or so most widely spoken languages have attained if the external conditions had been right. English, French, German, and Spanish are important languages because of the history and influence of their populations in modern times; for this reason, they are widely studied outside the country of their use. Sometimes the cultural importance of a nation has at some former time been so great that its language remains important long after it has ceased to represent political, commercial, or other greatness. Greek, for example, is studied in its classical form because of the great civilization preserved and recorded in its literature, but in its modern form as spoken in Greece today, the Greek language does not serve as a language of wider communication.
Baugh and Cable (8) ˤ⡤Ʊݤε롥
[T]he spread of a language---whether reconstructed Indo-European, Latin, French, or English---results from demographic, military, political, and economic forces rather than from any features intrinsic to the language. It is often noted that Latin as the language of an empire was not hindered in its spread by the grammatical declensions of five cases for its nouns or by the complex conjugations of its verbs. The subjunctive mood was irrelevant to the conquest of Gaul.
ֱѸϴñȤʤäפȤ褦¯⤬ޤ˹ϤӤäƤΤǡϤޤäθǤ뤳ȤƶĴƤرѸˤDzۤѸθ --- ǼƱѸؤ֤ˡ9ϡֱѸϴñ̸ˤʤä⻲Ȥ줿
Baugh, Albert C. and Thomas Cable. A History of the English Language. 6th ed. London: Routledge, 2013.
#2427. ̤ʸ ([2015-12-19-1]) εǿ줿褦ˡ̤ʸβɤˤϥޥ롥ԤβɥץҲ𤹤ϰΥߥƥȤäƤ褯ºݤ˿¿ǤƤ롥¿ʸηϤäƤɤߤ䤹ȤǤϡˤǤ롥ܼȡʷϵĤ
åФɤ
ڥ륷ܸʸ
٥ҥȥɤιʸ
ܸʸǽ줿֥Υ
ʸκȯ
ҥåȤʸ
ʥʸȥե٥åȤε
ȥꥢ
泤θʸ
쥿ߥʸȯ
ʸBȷ۲ȥȥꥹ
٥ꥢǸĤäȥ륳ʸ
ùʸʸ
ۥȰפʸ
奤ǥνʸ
ʸȥʸ
եȥαפʸA
롼ʸȥʸ
εȥѥʸ
ǸŤʸϤɤޤǤɤ뤫
ʸϤ˲ɤ뤫
(234) ϡǽϡָʸϤ˲ɤ뤫פǡߤޤǤʸɤˤ4ʳʬƤ롥
(1) ꤵλʰȬ
(2) ޥλʰ
(3) λȾ
(4) ʳŪõλȾ
褯ħȤ館ʬǤ롥ʸɤޥͶΤϡ줬ݱʤ۹ȽŤʤ뤫(2) Ρ֥ޥλפطʤˤϡ֥衼åؤλüŪˤп̱ϼ (239) äȤϵʤJean-François Champollion (1790--1832) Υå (Rosetta stone) βɤˤʩѤ褤ؤäƤ뤷ܸʸɤ˹ Sir Henry Creswicke Rawlinson (1810--95) βַͤä
(3) λϡŪ˹ųŪȯ꼡Ȥȴط롥쥿硤ҥåȡХӥ˥ץȡơҤȯˤꡤ³ȿʸȯƤϲɤλߤդƤä
³ (4) λϡλΤ褦˸ĿͤγؼԤ֤ȲɤĩȤϡԽĤѤ䥳ԥ塼ȤưŹΤ褦ˤ̤ʸ˸Ǥ롥ء׳ءŹɤμˡѤʤĴʤƤˤʤäϤʸɤΡ֥ޥפλȤϸȤ⡤ȤƥޥΤΤϻĤäƤΤǤ롥
ʸסزɡʸ١˼1999
졦ʸȽδطˤĤƤϡܥ֥͡ʲսǿƤ (㤨С#296. 轡ѸܸͿŪƶ ([2010-02-17-1])#753. ʤθϸŤᤫ ([2011-05-20-1])#1455. gematria ([2013-04-21-1])#1545. "lexical cleansing" ([2013-07-20-1])#1546. ʬۤȽʬۡ ([2013-07-21-1])#1636. Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian ([2013-10-19-1])#1869. ܸˤʩá ([2014-06-09-1])#2408. ץʸˤߤѰۤȻΤѲ ([2015-11-30-1])#2417. ʸݼƿ ([2015-12-09-1]) ʤɤ)
ˤȤäơʸˤ礭2Ĥ䤬ΤǤϤʤ1Ĥϡŵ경ΰҿݻ䡤⤦1ĤϡդνĤƻȤƤǤ롥ԤܼŪʸݼƯΤФơԤˤƤʸɬפ˱Ƥ뤳Ȥ⤢롥ºݡඵǤϡϰǤΥӥʸΰҿ⤯ݤƤ뤳Ȥ顤ʸԤ䤬ͥǤ롥ꥹȶǤϡषƻ衹ǡʸηϤ߽ФȤˤ֤ƤƤꡤʸθԤ䤬ŦΤϡʸȽ (103--27) ꤹʸϤ路ʸؼԤǤ롥Ϣʬ3սȴФ
ʹ֤ʸȯľܤưϡʤȤ⥪ꥨȤˤƤϡкѳưȴطΤֵϿפΤǤä褦˻פ뤬Ȥηդ⤫ʤ礭ʬƤ褦ʵ롥ꥨȤǤϾ嵭ΡֵϿפ¿Ͽ¤ǿΤǤäνʸʹùʸˤϿ̿ꤦȤνưڤΥʤäǤ롥(p. 105)
ꥹȶλ̱ۤ²Τ勞ۤΤǤꡤζϹҤ٤ΤǤä濴ŪʸǤؿ١ʥء͡ǥơˤꥹȤäȻפǤϤʤơζʿפʥꥷʥ͡ˤǵ줿ꥹȶ̤ɬ⥮ꥷɤळȤ뤳ȤϤʤꥹȶڤǮƻԤʤξؿ٤Ǥ뤬ǤϳŵȤŵȸƤФʸޤळȤ⤢ˤƤƤ뤫Ǥ롥ǮϡʸʤȤʸϤФۤɤǤꡤƸФʸɽŪʤΤȤƤϥץʸʸʸƥեΥ˥ʸ른ʸ롥 (pp. 110--11)
إ٤ϥඵ̤ˤȤäƥå顼θդΤΤǤ뤬줬ӥɽ蘆줿Ȥ顤ӥϤпʸȹͤ졤ඵ̤ˤϥӥγؽݤ뤳Ȥˤʤäƥඵ̥ӥڤäƤڤʤĤʤĤȤˤʤꡤˤϥӥʸŤڤϤޤäꥹȶ٤ѶŪ˹ԤʤϤ̱²ˤʸ¤ԤʤäΤФơඵϡإ٤ؤʥǤ϶ǯ˻ޤǸˤǤʤäϥȥ륳ϤᤤĤƤˡӥˤإ٤γؽϤΥޥɥ饵ʥ⥹°ΥعˤǹԤʤä褿ΤˡӥμդǤϥӥʸѤ뤳ȤˤʤäΥʥڥ륷ˡե˥ʥѥȥʤɡˡѥʥɥʤɡˤʤɤΤۤĤƤΥȥ륳ȥ륭ʥޥȥ륳ʤɡˡեꥫʥҥꥴʤɡˡɥͥʵ쥤ɥͥ졤ޥ饤ʤɡˤǤ롥 (pp. 124--25)
Τ褦ˡʸȿ2ĤȤϡꥹȶȥඵߤ롥츫ȡꥹȶϳŪඵĺŪȤΩŪʿǤ롥狼䤹ǤˡդʤФʤʤ⤢롥λˤȤСꥹȶǤˤޤĤʤޤˤ¿ϿƤඵǤ⾯ʤϰǥӥΥϼºݤƤ
ƱͤˡʸˤݼȳܼŪäƤ롥Ȥ꤬ʸΤʤŪѤ뤫˱ơʸѰۤ롤ȤȤǤϤʤ
ʸסʸؤΤΤߡ١罤ۡ1977ǯ
may ˤĤơ#1867. May the Queen live long! θ ([2014-06-07-1])#2256. ɽ魯 may ν ([2015-07-01-1])#2478. may ȴ let ȯã ([2016-02-08-1]) ǰäƤˤĤơǶᡤʸ줿Ѹ may ʸγΩϡűѸμ˸ŪװѤ߽Ťʤä̤ǤꡤīͼäΤǤϤʤȤݤŪʻƱäǤ롥
ξܺ٤ˤϿʤ (82) may ʸǤޤǡפꤹǿŪʬѤ롥
a. STAGE 1: OE ?
I wish that NP-Nom[inative]. + V-S[u]BJ[unctive]. ̽°
... (so) that NP-Nom. + V-SBJ. ̽°
b. STAGE 2: OE ?
NP-Nom. + V-SBJ. ̼͡ex) God bless you!
X + V-SBJ. + NP-Nom. ̼͡ex) Long live the Queen!
c. STAGE 3: Late OE ?
I wish that NP-Nom. + MAY + Inf[initive]. ̽°
... (so) that NP-Nom. + MAY + Inf. ̽°
d. STAGE 4: ME ? *EModE/ME ?
NP-Nom. + MAY/MIGHT + Inf. ̼͡ex) Thy voyce may sounde in mine eres.
*X + NP-Nom. + MAY/MIGHT + Inf. ̼ ex) from dyssese he may us saue.
X + MAY/MIGHT + NP-Nom. + Inf. ̼͡ex) ai mighte he liven.
Cf. (X) + MOTE + NP-Nom. + Inf. ̼ ex) mote þu wel færen
Cf. LET + NP-Nom. + Inf. ̼͡ex) late we hine welden his folc ...
e. STAGE 5: EModE ?
MAY + NP-Nom. + Inf. ̼͡ex) May the force be with you!
Ϣή˴ؤäƤװϡưν°ˡȸ硤³ˡѤˡ³ˡѤȤƤνư may ȯãνư motan εˡαƶlet ʸȤ䡤"pragmatic particle" ȤƤ may Ȥθȯãʤ¿ˤ錄롥餬ʣ߹礤1Ĥħˡޤ줿ȤʥꥪˡѸˤ˱Ѹؤ̣롥
ʡ"May the Force Be with You!"Ѹ may ʸˤĤơסطضס642015ǯ77--84ǡ
[2016-01-09-1], [2016-01-10-1], [2016-02-12-1] ȽäƤ#2448. (1) ([2016-01-09-1]) ǡΰȤƲؤν˸ڤˤĤơѤ (199--200) ⤦1Ĥζ̣ȹ碌Ʋ⤷ƤΤǡΤѤ褦
ʸǽȤƽĽʾ夫鲼ˡʺӱˡüȤƱ뤳ȤҤ٤ޤȤĽפäƤʤäȤΤ褦ȯΤǡˤĤä뤳Ȥˤ
ΰĤϤȥ륳ʸ˴ؤΤǡβɤΥץϥɡ֥ۡեؼ줿ʸβɡIIIʻܽŹ˼?졻ڡ˾ܤˤϥȥॻˤŷŪʲɤνȯǤ롤ʸηϤνʱˤȯϽҤ٤Ƥ뤬ºݤˤϤ줬عޤƤ㤬뤳ȤϽƤʤäΤȤΤäΤƣΡʸʸˡ١ʴȽŹμεҤˤäƤä
ֽ˥Υȥ륳ؼԥ顼ɥդظŤõơʸĤȯïɤळȤϤǤʤäκϺꥭ롦ƥǡ¦˴ʸˤʸʸäƤä顼ɥդơǥޡθؼVȥॼǽˤɤȽäȤϡʸϱʤΤĴҤ뤿ˡüĸ˹äƤΤǡ졹ιԤϱβü˸äɤޤͤФʤʤסƱڡˡ
Ľ˹碌ΤʤС夫鲼ˡʤĤޤդˤơ˽Ƥ褵ʤΤƤͭ̾ʡʶή١ȬˤΥꥢʸϾ夫鲼ؤνĽ˽Ƥ뤬ǤβؤȤΤϴ̯ʽΤǤ롥
Ȥ⤦ġդĤ˲ʸƤ㤬Ĥḁ̈եꥫΥ٥٥ͤΰѤƤƥեʥʸǡΥ̥ߥǥʸηĤǤʤʸˤĤƤɮԤΡ֥եꥫʸʸơסʷָ̺إեꥫʸȸٽ罤۴Ȥ줿ˡʸǤϤʤȤƤ뤳ȤϡůϺإåꡦʥ롽פȤá2١ʿҥ顼ˤƤ뤬Τʤ˴ɤ˽줿ʸμ̿ޤޤƤ롥įᡤޤ¾ʸäƤ뤦ˡ餬ؽƤ뤳Ȥ˵ŤϽ꤬顤ΤȤɤ˽ˤޤȤƤ롥ˤäƿĹϰ㤦顤ȯüˤƤ櫓ǡȾͷ̱Υ٥٥ͤʤϢ̣ۤǤȸͤФʤʤ
ؤνŪ˳ΩƤϡޤʤ嵭θȥ륳ʸƥեʥʸΤ褦üʾǤλϤȤȤˤʤ롥⤷ʤɤˤ⸫줽ȤäȤƤüˤϰ㤤ʤ§Ȥơ˻ּ˱ä (linearity) ΤƱͤˡˤϽϤ˰¸夫鲼ȤȤΤǤϤʤ
ʸסʸؤΤΤߡ١罤ۡ1977ǯ
ƣ ʸʸˡ١ȽŹ1971ǯ1991ǯ
#2448. (1) ([2016-01-09-1])#2449. (2) ([2016-01-10-1]) ˰³ƤꡥˡʸؤΤΤߡ٤11ϡ֥ե٥åʸηϤȽ (pp. 189--200) ɤϥե٥åȤ˸ꤹ뤬νñɤäƤߤ
ե٥åʸηϤεˤĤƤϡ#423. ե٥åȤˡ ([2010-06-24-1])#490. ե٥åȤε North Semitic ̤롩 ([2010-08-30-1])#1822. ʸη ([2014-04-23-1])#1834. ʸǯɽ ([2014-05-05-1])#1849. ե٥åȤηޡ ([2014-05-20-1])#1853. ʸη (2) ([2014-05-24-1])#2398. ʸη (3) ([2015-11-20-1]) ʤɤǸƤʤ椬¿ץʸ (hieroglyph) ľܡܤλɷͿ餷Ȥ¿Ԥδ֤ǰפƤ롥
ץʸνϡꡤꡤĽɬꤷƤʤä̤ˤϱŪ¿äȤϻ¤Ǥ롥Ǥϡκݤʸ̤Τ褦˺žƤꡤоäΤȹͤ롥ʸαˤĤơ (193) ϡ֤ʤͥǤäˤĤƤưפʤŪ˸С¿ǡ˻äɮDZ麸ص뤹ȤϤƼʹ٤ǤϤʤäȻפ롥ݥߥܸʸηϤǺԤʤ줿ΤϡϤĽä˶彽ٲžǽ褦ˤʤäǤꡤϤᤫ麸ΤǤϤʤפȽҤ٤Ƥ롥ʹ֤αͥλ¤ϡٻװȤƻФԤ⤤뤳Ȥ顤ɤޤϤ뤫Ϥ狼ʤ
ơΥץʸȸΥե٥åȤӤĤ븰Ȥʤ뤫⤷ʤʸηϤȤơӥ֥ʸ롥ϲʸǤꡤϱäե٥åȤθĤ1ĤǤϤʤܤ븶ʥʸϡĽ¿ʤʤʤɤ⤢ꡤ̤ȤƽϰꤷƤʤ
θ³ե˥ʸǤϡץʸӥ֥ʸƱͤˡ줿줬ꥷͤμϤꡤ첻ʸդä졤ꥷʸäơꥷǤⱦԤ줿θɤҥåȾݷʸ˸褦ʵ̼ (boustrophedon) ʳФơذܹԤ餷κžηˤĤơ (195--96) ϼΤ褦˿¬Ƥ롥
ե˥ʸꥷɽΤ˼Ѥ줿ˤˤϡΥꥷʸν¿ϱǤꡤˤϥ֥ȥեɥΤ褦Ūʷ⤢äθοΤߤΤ˺夷ͳϤϤäꤷʤե˥ʸǤ첻ʤǤäñλʤʿѻ?ʸˡɤ餫ƤȽɤˤޤ꺤ʤäȹͤΤФꥷʸǤ첻ɽ褦ˤʤäñλäƤΤǡ֥ȥեɥƺˤʤäȸΤǤϤʤ
ꥷʸ饢ե٥åȤäƲɤȥꥢͤ⡤ɸȤʤ⡤㳰Ū˵̼亸⸫뤳Ȥ顤ꥷͤκѤ褦˻פ롥ˡޥե٥åȤǤ¿κ𤬸줿5ʹߤϡꥷǤޤǤ⺸夷θ塤衼åѤμʸηϤνݻƤȤϼΤ̤Ǥ롥
ե˥ʸޤǤʸΡͳױϡθإ֥饤졤ӥ졤ꥢʤɤطѾ졤˻롥ʸͳŸʸʸʸ⡤ηѤ̤ŸԥʸɷϽʸեʸʥ˥ʸ른ʸˤʤ¿Ϻ夷
ޤǿƤʤäѤäȤơ֥եȥαספǧֱפ⤢뤳ȤƤ̤ɤʸϡɤ鱲γɤޤ줿餷ݻʤɤˤ⡤㤬ꤽۤˡܸοûΤΡֻ餷פ㳰ŪʽȤäȤ⡤Τ褦̯ʽϡȤṲ̄äΤȻפ롥
ʸסʸؤΤΤߡ١罤ۡ1977ǯ
к۰Сɤμǡ27դεȤhelp oneself to Ȥɽˤ to ˤĤơȤ꤬Ƥ롥Ѥֻ줬ʤ to ʤΤȤ䤤ϳΤѤʵǤ롥кβŪͤƤꡤ褯ޤȤޤäƤΤǡľܤеɹ뤬äȤդȤƸŪѸŪ¦̤饳ȤƤߤ褦Ȼפ
Ѹ help ܸΡֽפˤԤäб褦˴졤ͤɽ魯ľŪ줬³ΤȤФ롥ŪϸűѸǤгʡľŪˤǤϤʤͿʡʴŪˤ°ʤäȤ顤ȤƤϡ֡ʿ͡ˤ˼ߤס֡ʿ͡ˤΤصפס֡ʿ͡ˤΩġפۤɤäȻפ롥ѸޤǤͿʤгʤ˷Ūͻ礷Ƥޤäˡߡʤζ̤ϤۤȤɴʤhelp ѤƼθˡ乽ʸˤϡͿʤ̣ĤäƤ褦˴롥嵭Τ褦濴Ūʰ̣ϡ֡ʿ͡ˤΩġפȤŪʤΤǤ뤫顤Ū̾ʸ̮ǤϡΩĤΤʤصʤΤɤΤ褦˽ΤˤĤɬפǤ롥ǡФСhelp + Ūפθˤϼ硤ֻ硤礬³?Ǥ褦˿ͤ˼ߤƤפۤɤ̣뤳Ȥˤʤ롥help him out (of the trouble), help her with her homework, help them across the street, help us (to) carry the luggage (see #971. help + פε ([2011-12-24-1])#972. help + פλỤ̄ ([2011-12-25-1])) ʤɡǤ help Ū줿̣ͤ塤³ղȷӤĤưФưȤʤäƤꡤʸΤȤơֿͤ?뤳ȤƤפ̣Ū˺ʬϤ뤳ȤǽȤʤ롥Сhelp him out he (be) out ΤǤꡤhelp her with her homework she (do) her homework ΤǤꡤhelp them across the street they (go) across the street ȤȤˤʤ롥Ĥޤꡤhelp θˤϡJespersen Τͥط (nexus) ŵŪ³Τ褦˹ͤȡʪδؤ Help yourself to some cake. ʤɤǤϡyou (come up) to some case ʤξּסˤȤȤˤʤꡤ̤Ȥơּͳˤ夬꤯פΰ̣Ȥʤ뤳Ȥʬ
OED help ... to ... ιʸˤõȡֻ to Ūϡɬʪ˸¤ʤä褦褦Ǥ롥Ѹ Wycliffe ˡνȤƵƤꡤǤ to ŪȤƤϰʪʳʪ⤢뤷ʤɤ⤢롥षʪŪ˼ˡϡѸˡŪʾ嵭ˡȯãΤΤ褦OED Ǥϰʪν1688ǯˡ
⤷Τϡ餯ΰʪǤˡʬ夷19Ƭˡʪ help Ū˼ꡤͤ to Ū˼롤 help some cake to yourself εž礬뤳ȤǤ롥
1805 Emily Clark Banks of Douro II. 191 A goose..which [she] carved and helped to every person that chose to have any of it.
ϡǧΰ̣ǤФм夲 John loaded hay onto the truck. vs John loaded the truck with hay. ˤߤŪֻθظݤפcf. ܸΡ֥ڥɤɤפȡ֥ڥɤɤסˡʤŪ transposition ˤĤƤϡ#1775. rob A of B ([2014-03-07-1]) ⻲Ȥ줿
θ塤19Ⱦư̾ helping Ĥաפΰ̣̾ȤȤΩƤȤˤƤ (cf. a second helping 2ܡˡˡޤľܤδطϤʤThomas Carlyle (1795--1881) ¤ self-help ʼΩˤ줿Τ⤿ޤƱ1831ǯǤ롥Samuel Smiles (1812--1904) ̾ Self-Help (1859) ϡ椬Ǥ¼ľ (1832--98) Ωԡ (1871) Ȥ˷ؽȤƥ٥ȥ顼ȤʤäͤƤߤСּΩפδܤϡȤǿäƤ뤳ȡפǤ롥help ... to ... ˡʪòΤ⤦ʤ褦ʵ
[2016-02-05-1]ε˰³̿ưθѤˤĤơεΰˤäMustanoja (473--74) ̿ȴ (interjection) ζ˸ڤƤ롥βսѤ褦
There is a striking functional resemblance between the imperative and the interjections. Both are functionally self-contained exclamatory expressions, both are little articulate (the singular imperative has no ending or has only -e, and the subject-pronoun is seldom expressed), and both are greatly dependent on intonation. In fact many interjections, primary and secondary, are used to express exhortations and commands (a-ha, hay, hi, harrow, out, etc. . . .), and many imperatives are used as interjections (abide, come, go bet, help, look . . . cf. present-day interjections like come on, go away, hear hear, say, say there, etc.)
ˡMustanoja (630--31) Ǥϡư̿¾δȤʤäƤ㤬¿Ƥ롥
Brief commands, exhortations, and entreaties are comparable to interjections. Thus in certain circumstances the imperative mood of verbs may serve as a kind of interjection: --- abyd, Robyn, my leeve brother (Ch. CT A Mil. 3129); --- come, þou art mysbilevyd (Cursor App. ii 823); --- go bet, peny, go bet, go! (Sec. Lyr. lvii refrain); --- quad Moyses, 'loc, her nu [is] bread' (Gen. & Ex. 3331); --- help, hooly croys of Bromeholm! (Ch. CT A Rv. 4286; in this and many other cases help might equally well be interpreted as a noun). Somewhat similar stereotyped uses of the imperative are herken and listen, which occur as conventional opening exclamations in numerous ME poems (herkneþ, boþe yonge and olde; --- lystenyþ, lordynges . . . .
ưˤ̿δȯϪȤƤȤ館СưȤʻ°Ȥü𤬤ǡϳΤ˴ȵǽŪ˻Ƥ롥ѲǤ뤫Τ褦ưθѤȤΤϡԻĤǤϤʤ
Mustanoja, T. F. A Middle English Syntax. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique, 1960.
#1408. ([2013-03-05-1]) #1410. Ƚ ([2013-03-07-1]) ʤɤεǡѸ̸üѤȿưȤƤθ (purism) ˿줿Τ˽ԤȤ Sir John Cheke (1514--57), Roger Ascham (1515?--68), Sir Thomas Chaloner, Thomas Wilson (1528?--81) ʤɤθ̾뤬Görlach (163--64) ϡѹͥˤȿưŪˤĤƤϲɾƤȤƤ롥ȤɬפʸäϼѤºݤ˼ѤΤǤꡤޤǥƥ䥮ꥷθä̵̤ʼѤѤΤǤ롤ȡĹ⤷ʤΤǡΤޤްѤ褦
Purism, understood as resistance to foreign words and as awareness of the possibilities of the vernacular, presupposes a certain level of standardization of, and confidence in, the native tongue. It is no surprise that puristic tendencies are unrecorded before the end of the Middle Ages --- wherever native expressions were coined to replace foreign terms, they served a different purpose to help the uneducated understand better, especially sermons and biblical paraphrase. Tyndale's striving for the proper English expression was still motivated by the desire to enable the ploughboy to understand more of the Bible than the learned bishops.
A puristic reaction was, then, provoked by fashionable eloquence, as is evident from aspects of fifteenth-century aureate diction and sixteenth-century inkhornism . . . . The humanists had rediscovered a classical form of Latin instituted by Roman writers who fought against Greek technical terms as well as fashionable Hellenization, but who could not do without terminologies for the disciplines dominated by Greek traditions. Ascham, Wilson and Cheke (all counted among the 'purists' in a loose application of the term) behaved exactly as Cicero had done: they wrote in the vernacular (no obvious choice around 1530--50), avoided fashionable loanwords and fanciful, rare expressions, but did not object to the borrowing of necessary terms.
Cheke was as inconsistent a 'purist' as he was a reformer of EModE spelling . . . . On the one hand, he went further than most of his contemporaries in his efforts to preserve the English language "vnmixt and vnmangeled" . . ., but on the other hand he also borrowed beyond what was necessary and what his own tenets seemed to allow. (The problem of untranslatable terms, as in his renderings of biblical antiquities, was solved by marginal explanations.) The practice (and historical ineffectiveness) of other 'purists', too, who attempted translations of Latin terminologies --- Golding for medicine, Lever for philosophy and Puttenham for rhetoric . . . --- demonstrates that there was no such rigorous puristic movement in sixteenth-century England as there was in many other countries during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The purists' position and their influence on EModE has often been exaggerated; it is more to the point to speak of "different degrees of Latinity" . . . .
Görlach θϡȤϰۤʤȼλŦǤꡤ¿ѸΥեѸȽ䡤ܸˤΥץڤΥʸήȤδطǻŦ⡤λ鸫ľƤߤΤ⤪⤷ (see #2147. ѸΥեѸȽ ([2015-03-14-1])#1630. 졤ʸ졤ץ ([2013-10-13-1])#1999. Chuo Online ε֥ʸΩŪ˻ס ([2014-10-17-1])ˡ
Görlach, Manfred. Introduction to Early Modern English. Cambridge: CUP, 1991.
#1867. May the Queen live long! θ ([2014-06-07-1]) κǸǿ줿褦ˡmay ʸ let ʸˤ롥Ūˤκǽ˸Ȥ˳Ūľ3;μ뤳ȤǤŪˤϵꡦȤ̣ǻ̤äȯù٤ôȤǤ롥Ǹλ̤äƤ˴ؤƤСȯù٤⡤űѸ줫ѸˤŵŪư³ˡˤäɽ路Ȥ롥̻Ūˤϡmay ˤ let ˤ衤³ˡưѤ̳뱪ˡΩŪʤȤơꥢϤ櫓Τ˻Ѥ경гơȴȤȯù٤ɸޡʤ "pragmatic particle" ȤƵǽ˻ämay let ŪȤƱ˰ȤȯۤϡεǸڤ Quirk et al. Τߤʤ餺Ѹ椷Ƥ Rissanen (229) ˤäƤ⼨Ƥʾp. 82 ⻲ȡˡ
The optative subjunctive is often replaced by a periphrasis with may and the hortative subjunctive with let:
(229) 'A god rewarde you,' quoth this roge; 'and in heauen may you finde it.' ([HC] Harman 39)
(230) Let him love his wife even as himself: That's his Duty. ([HC] Jeremy Taylor 24)
Note the variation between the subjunctive rewarde and the periphrastic may . . . finde in (229).
Of these two periphrases, the one replacing hortative subjunctive seems to develop more rapidly: in Marlow, at the end of the sixteenth century, the hortative periphrasis clearly outnumbers the subjunctive, particularly in the 1 st pers. pl. . ., while the optative periphrasis is less common than the subjunctive.
Rissanen ϡmay let ѤŪꡦˡȯãƱ˰äƤ뤬ξԤߤ˱ƶäɤˤƧ߹ǤʤȯãκˤĤƸڤƤ뤳Ȥ顤ԤȯãԤȯãˤ¥ʤ줿ȤߤƤǽϤ뤷ʤȤ Rissanen ȤƤ뾾 (82) ϤΤ褦˲ᤷƤ褦ΰ̴طִطˤĤƤϤܺ٤Ĵɬפ츫Ȥޤǰۤʤˤߤ may let ѡʾ˲η뾽ȤƸƶ٤ࡥ
ϢƵ may ˤĤƤϡ#2256. ɽ魯 may ν ([2015-07-01-1]) let's δּѲˤĤƤϡ#1981. ּѲ ([2014-09-29-1]) ⻲ȡ
Rissanen, Matti. Syntax. In The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. 3. Cambridge: CUP, 1999. 187--331.
ʡ"May the Force Be with You!"Ѹ may ʸˤĤơסطضס642015ǯ77--84ǡ
#2473. եˤߤ20ˡλ ([2016-02-03-1]) Ǥäȿ줿Ѹˤ score Ȥñ̤20Ȥ롥˴Ťɽ threescore years and ten Ͽʹ֤μ̿ȤƤ70ǯΤȤǤꡤAbraham Lincoln ˤ The Gettysburg Address νФΡFour score and seven years ago 87ǯˤȤɽϹΤƤ롥㤬Ȥꡤ201Ȥñ̤ȤƤ score ñʣƱǤꡤʣ -s Τʤ (see #12. How many carp! ([2009-05-11-1])) score λѤϳΤ˸ߤǤϸǼŪȤ뤬20ȤȯۤѸθʸ¸ߤƤȤϳΤǤ롥
score θ츻ϡѸǤϤʤťΥɸˤ롥OED score, n. ˤСťΥɸνѲ̾ skor (notch, tally, the number of twenty) űѸƱѲ̾ scoru ȤƼѤ줿ΤǤ롥ޥ캬 *skurō캬 *(s)ker- ̤ꡤϡڤפǤ (cf. shear, share) εϿΤγ (tally) ˡ20Ȥ1ĤڤߤƤäüȯΤǤϤʤȤOED ۩"[Presumably from the practice, in counting sheep or large herds of cattle, of counting orally from 1 to 20, and making a 'score' (sense 9 [=tally]) or notch on a stick, before proceeding to count the next twenty.]" θ츻䤷̤ˡȤȤαѸʸ20ˡȯۤäȤϡťΥɸʸαƶǤʬŪѤ뤳ȤˤʤäȤۤʤ褦Ǥ롥
ʤOED ˤűѸ줫νϡ"[a1100 Bury St. Edm. Rec. in A. S. Napier Old Eng. Glosses 56 Þæt is..v scora [glossed quinquies uiginti] scæp..& viii score [octies uiginti] æcere gesawen.]" ȤƵƤ롥ˤƥ viginti Ȥ score ƤƤΤ⼨ŪǤϤ롥Ѹʹߤ⡤ˤϻ礫ʤ (cf. MED scōr(e (n.))
#2473. եˤߤ20ˡλ ([2016-02-03-1]) εǡե vingt quatre-vingts ˤߤ20ˡȯۤܿ˵Ȥ⤬뤳ȤθܿϡˤϥΥޥ͡ˤϥȿͤǤȤ졤ޤϤʤ褦⤷ԤǤθϤ餯ťΥɸȤˤʤΤν˴ؤơAcadémie Française Questions de langue ˸ڤΤǡȤ줿HPƤäؤΥե˴դޤ *
ε#2475. ̿ˤϤʤưθѤΤ ([2016-02-05-1]) Ƥ̩ܤ˴ؤΤȤơɸ꤬롥ѸˤǤϡưñ̿³ˡ߷Ūͻ礷Ƥаޤ롥¹ԤơξԤεǽʤ̿ȤȤ櫓ȯù (speech_act) ⤬ͻ礷ƤȤаޤꡤѸˤƤϡϤ֤ˤƤⵡǽˤƤ⡤ĤƤä̤ƤȤʤ˻äƤ롥ξԤͻؤƻڤϡ1ĤˤϴŪʴ鵭Ҥ뤳ȤǤ롥̿ϡεǽҤ٤褦ˡ캬̵ˤظ䤹ä³ˡߤϷ֡ǽŪ˿ष̤Ȥľˡߤݤ߹ޤ줿
̿³ˡ߷ͻϡľŪξԤεǽŪˤä¥ʤ줿Ȥ뤫⤷ʤȤ櫓𡦾ɽ魯ΤѤ³ˡˤĤƤϡ줬ǽ̿Ȥȯù٤˶Ƥ뤳ȤưפǤ
εǰѤ Fischer (249) ϡ嵭ˤĤƼΤ褦˽Ҥ٤Ƥ롥
In Middle English the forms of the imperative singular and the subjunctive present singular coalesced . . . . In function, the hortatory subjunctive and the imperative were practically similar already in Old English, where one finds them used side by side . . . . In the plural there was still a morphological distinction . . . when the subject pronoun did not immediately follow the verb. This situation was not to last, as the hortatory subjunctive was on its way out. . . . By the middle of the fifteenth century the plural imperative ending disappears.
Fischer ȯϡ2;Τñʣξˤ̿ˡ³ˡͻ礬֥١ǤȤȤ˵ǽ١Ǥ⤢äȤƤ褦ɤ롥
ʣ̿ˤĤƤ⡤ñƱͤˡ15ȾФޤǤˤ̵ȤʤäƤȤ뤬Τˤʳ Chaucer դǤϡŪñʣηṲ̄Ǥ˻¾μͳѰۤȲƤ롥㤨СChaucer (CT III.186--7 [2:186--7]) Ǥ "Telle forth youre tale, spareth for no man,/ And teche us yonge men of youre praktike." ʤɤȸ̵ͭܤޤ뤷ڤؤäƤ롥
˻̤äƸűѸͻҤߤƤߤȡTraugott (185) ϡ̿ˡ³ˡεǽṲ̄ϡ9ޤǤˤϤ褽ĤĤäȤƤ롥
Because the imperative and subjunctive contrast morphologically, we assume that there was a difference in meaning, at least in early OE times, between more and less directive, more and less wishful utterances. By the time of Alfredian OE this difference was losing ground in many registers; charms, medical prescriptions and similar generalised instructions are normally in the subjunctive.
θ礹ȡͻϡϤ֥١ǤƱͤ˵ǽ١Ǥ⤢äȹͤΤ⤷ʤ
Fischer, O. Syntax. In The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. 2. Ed. N. Blake. Cambridge, CUP, 1992. 207--398.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. Syntax. In The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. 1. Ed. Richard M. Hogg. Cambridge: CUP, 1992. 168--289.
ɸϡѸ̿ʸ˴ؤơ#2289. ̿ʸ˼줬ʤ ([2015-08-03-1]) ¤ǡĹ餯˴Ƥ뤳ȤǤ롥
Ūˤϡ̸̿ĤΤΤǤ롥㤨СűѸΡֹԤפɽ魯ưˤĤơ2;ñؤ̿ gā2;ʣؤ̿ gāþ gān Ǥꡤ줾֤ϰۤʤäƤѸʹߡζʿŪ˸¤ go ؤȼ̤
Τ褦ŪطʤϤˤ衤ѸŪʴįСŵŪ̿Ѥưη֤ϡ븶ˤη֤ȴ˰פƤ롥äơ̻Ūʴȴ˵ҤΤǤСʤƤüԤʸˡȿǤƤȻפ뤬ˡ̿ȸȤѸ̤ɬפϤʤ̿ˤưθѤפȸäƺ٤ʤ⤷줬üԤζŪФȤСɽ魯̿εǽƱη֤Τʤ˶¸Ƥ뤳Ȥ˴ؤơǧξɤΤ褦ˤȤ館ƤΤ
ˤĤơ (83) ǻȤƤ Fischer (249) ΥȤäƤߤ
The imperative has a tendency to become invariant in form (this happened also in other Germanic languages), because it functions like a self-contained, exclamatory expression. Mustanoja (1960: 473) compares its function to that of (invariable) interjections. In an example like,
(109) Help! Water! Water! Help, for Goddes herte! (CT I.3815 [1:3807])
help is as much an interjection as an imperative.
̿ȴòϤδȯϪȤƵǽŪ˻̤äƤꡤ椨θ캬ΤΡʱѸξˤϡʤˤѤȲǤٹ (157) òʸȤδϢǽҤ٤ƤդڤСΤ褦ʸ캬ϡָ줬ʸˡŪˤȤ줺ξεޤʤޤޤ˸ŪθԸ줿פΤȤȤ館뤳ȤǤ롥
ʡ"May the Force Be with You!"Ѹ may ʸˤĤơסطضס642015ǯ77--84ǡ
Fischer, O. Syntax. In The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. 2. Ed. N. Blake. Cambridge, CUP, 1992. 207--398.
ٹ ﵭرʸˡ3ǡʸƲ1926ǯ
ε#2473. եˤߤ20ˡλ ([2016-02-03-1]) ǤϡեοηϤΰˤߤ20ˡθˤĤƼ夲ե顼Ρؿˡ٤ˤȤäƥѥѥįƤȡˤϼ¤͡ʿΤȻפΤ餵롥οηϤظˤ10ˡ5ˡ20ˡ60ˡʤɤιͤϡθפȸƤФ뤬ʤΤ褦¿ͤ줬ޤƤΤ
ʹ֤ݲݤˤϡθ§Ƚθ§Ȥ2Ĥθ§ꤦ롥θ§Ȥϡñ1ɽ魯ΡʤȤˤɬפʿñ¤٤ƤȤȯۤǤ롥ñˡɽ魯礭ʤʤñ㤵ؤäƤ롥Фơθ§Ȥϡ1ƤФƸߤΩ̸ĤεƤˡǤ롥㤨С䤿ξѤƤ륢ӥϡ<1>, <2>, <3> ʤɤδ֤˸ߤ˼ʷŪϢʤᡤθ§˴ŤƤȤ롥θ§ϸΨϤ褵ȿбطŵʤФʤʤȤû꤬롥
Τ褦ξ§ˤϰĹû뤿ᡤºݤˤξԤĹ꤬¤˳褫褦ʷǿηϤƤĤۤɤοФƸߤΩƤ礭ϤενַפγǰƳ櫓Ūθơʹ֤Ƭ˰ŵ뤳ȤΤǤΤϡĤĤδ֤ˤȤɤޤꡤ줬10ˡ20ˡʤɤ߽ФΤ
äơοηϤ¿ȤϤäƤ⡤¿θ˴ѻפϡ˵褦ʿ˸¤Τ¤Ǥ롥3ˡ7ˡ18ˡʤɤޤʤΤФơ10ˡ5ˡ20ˡ60ˡʤɤŪ褯ΤϤʤ
10ˡϤȤ櫓ŪǤ롥ϡְ㤤ʤʹ֤λؤοȴط롥̾ξλؤѤƿ10ˡȯãΤϼҼ5ܻؤǿȤȤǤϤʤäơ5ˡưפǤ롥פʤΤϡ10ˡˤ5ˡˤʹ֤ζβ˶Ūħ˰¸ƤˤŪäǧʤȤȤŪ˹ͤʤС¿12ǿ7ʤɤΤۤͥƤ뤳ȤǤΤؤϤʤˤʹ֤ΤˤĤƤȶ¸ߤǤꡤθ§ȼŵôθȡ10ȤϤʤ˥ХȤƤȤ롥ơ10ϤŪȤʤäƤȹͤ롥
ؤޤƹͤȡ20ˡȤȯۤⰭʤ褦˻פ롥εǤ줿褦ˡºݤ˥ȸ졤ƥ졤ޥʤɤǤ˾ᤤ20ˡΥǥäƤҤΰŵôϤ礭ʤ롥äơ20ˡΤˤ衤θˤƤʬŪ10ˡʤɤȤƤ뤳Ȥ¿㤨СεDz⤷褦ˡƥ viginti (20) ϸ츻Ūˤ210ɽ魯ʬ롥
Ǹˡʤɤˤߤ60ˡͤ褦60ǤϰŵôҾǤʤȤưפ˻뤷ºݤˤŪʤ꾮ƳƤΤ60ˡˤŷʸؤؤʤɤγؽŪͭפ¦̤褦ե顼͡Ҳ𤷤Ƥ롥60ϡֺǤ¿ޤǤϺǤ⾮Ǥⰷ䤹ΤǤ (42) Ȥ1ǯ֤ϡüȤ360Ǥꡤ餯ˤäƱߤ360ʬ䤬Ԥʤ줿ΤǤޤߤ6ʬ1θȾ¤Ȥ¤顤οˤäƱߤ6ʬ䤹뤳ȤԤʤ졤η60ȤͥˤʤäΤ (42) ȤѷŤѤ10ʬ뤳Ȥˤäʿ̤60ʬԤʤ줿 (42) Ȥ60ȤФ줿ΤĤ̱²η礫Ȥǡ̱²ˡ¾ؤȤüʤǤ6˴Ť⤿餷 (43) ʤɡΤ⡤ΤˡŪͿƤȤϤߤʤ60ˡͳˤĤϤʤȤ٤Ǥ롥
ե顼ϾܤäƤʤΤʤˤ12ˡȯۤĤΤ⤢ (cf. dozen) Ͼ嵭60ˡȴϢΤǤϤʤʥե顼p. 42ˡ
ե顼른ˡ 졦 ȡˡؿˡϿɤΤ褦ˤƤ١ʿҡ1988ǯ
եοηϤʣǤ뤳ȤϤ褯ΤƤ롥1Ȥơvingt (20) ϡ80ɽ魯 quatre-vingts 4Ĥ20פˤ⸫褦ˡΩñ̤Ƥ롥ϤĤƤ20ˡ̾ĤȤ롥ѸǤ⡤ɽȤ three scores (60) Τ褦20ñ̤Ȥ score Ȥ줬뤬ŪǼŪ20ˡλˤʤեʤɤηŪ20ˡοηϤݻƤΤϡ衼åѤǤϥȸϤΤߤϤХƥ줬̩20ˡοηϤĤȤΤƤ롥20Ȥϡʹ֤μλؤο˴Ťȹͤ롥
եǤ⡤20ˡλϡ̤иϤ˸줿褦ե顼 (37--38) ϸŤե礤˽ФΤ褦˽Ҥ٤Ƥ롥
ƥƱեǤ <vingt (20)> ȤηϡʥƥǤ vigintiƥǤ vintiˡ20Ȥˤƿ̾ĤʤƤ롥ʤʤ顤θ餫 <deux (2)> (duo), <dix (10)> (decem) Ȥ̵طǤ롥ˡŤեǤϡե quatre-vingts (80) Τ褦ʷ𡧡һͤĤ20Ӥΰ̣ͤʤꤿ줿㤨60, 120, 140ϡ̤ trois-vingts ʻĤ20ˡsix-vingts ϻĤ20ˡsept-vingts ʼĤ20ˤȸƤ櫓ǡѥԤ220̾ηٻ̾Τ1120 Corps des Onze-VingtsӤȤʤäΤǤ롥ˡ륤913ܤϷʼ300ͤƤ뤿Ƥ줿±ˤϡ1520± Hôpital des Quinze-VingtsӤȤ̯̾դ줿ʤΤޤߤ˻äƤˡ
εҤˤСƥ viginti ϡduo (2) Ȥ decem (10) Ȥ̵طȤƤ뤬Ʒ줿ĸ *wīkmtī ϡ*wi- (two) + *dkmt- (ten) ̤Τǡ¤ϸ츻Ū̵طǤϤʤŪʵǽȤƤϡ2Ȥ10ȤϢŤƲᤵƤϤʤäȻפΤǡϤƥ viginti ե vingt ϻ¾Ωñ̤ȤƤߤƤ褤ʤѸ vicennial 20ǯΡˤϡ210Τ줾θ캬˸Ҳʻ (v, c) ݻƤ롥
եʬŪʤ20ˡοηϤޤޤƤΤϡʤͳˤΤˤˤĤƤϾܤĴƤʤܿ˵⤬Ƥ褦
Ѹˤ˴ؤ¾ο˴ؤƤϡ#100. hundred ȰӸء ([2009-08-05-1])#1150. centum satem ([2012-06-20-1])#2240. thousand "swelling hundred" ([2015-06-15-1])#2285. hundred "great ten" ([2015-07-30-1])#2286. űѸ hundseofontig (seventy), hundeahtatig (eighty), etc. ([2015-07-31-1])#2304. űѸ hundseofontig (seventy), hundeahtatig (eighty), etc. (2) ([2015-08-18-1]) ȡ
ե顼른ˡ 졦 ȡˡؿˡϿɤΤ褦ˤƤ١ʿҡ1988ǯ
#2469. αѸ([2016-01-30-1]) ˰³ϥեꥫαѸοפˤĤơGramley (307, 309, 311) "Anglophone Southern African countries", "Anglophone West African countries", "Anglophone East African countries" ɽǺܤ褦 * *
| country | significant UK contact | colonial status | independence | total population | English speakers | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| percentage | total number | |||||
| Botswana | 19th century | 1885 | 1966 | 1,640,000 | --38% | 630,000 |
| Lesotho | protectorate | 1966 | 1,800,000 | --28% | 500,000 | |
| Malawi | 1878 | 1891 | 1964 | 13,000,000 | --4% | 540,000 |
| Namibia | 1878 | 1920 (S. Afr.) | 1990 | 1,800,000 | --17% | > 300,000 |
| South Africa | 1795 | 1795 | 1910 | 47,850,000 | > 28% | 13,700,000 |
| Swaziland | 1894 | 1902 (UK) | 1968 | 1,140,000 | --4.4% | 50,000 |
| Zambia | 1888 | 1924 | 1953, 1964 | 13,000,000 | --15% | --2,000,000 |
| Zimbabwe | 1890 | 1923 | 1953, 1980 | 13,300,000 | --42% | 5,550,000 |
| Cameroon | 1914 | 1916 | 1960 | 18,500,000 | --42% | 7,700,000 |
| Gambia | 1661, 1816 | 1894 | 1965 | 1,700,000 | --2.3% | 40,000 |
| Ghana (formerly gold coast) | 1824, 1850 | 1874, 1902 | 1957 | 23,480,000 | --6% | 1,400,000 |
| Liberia | USA 1822 | none | 1847 | 3,750,000 | --83% | 3,100,000 |
| Nigeria | 1851 | 1884, 1900 | 1960 | 148,000,000 | --53% | 79,000,000 |
| Sierra Leone | 1787 | 1808 | 1961 | 5,800,000 | --83% | 4,900,000 |
| Kenya | 1886 | 1895, 1920 | 1963 | 39,000,000 | --9% | 2,700,000 |
| Tanzania | 1880s | 1890, 1920 | 1961 | 42,000,000 | --11% | 4,000,000 |
| Uganda | 1860s | 1888, 1890 | 1962 | 31,000,000 | --10% | 2,500,000 |
In most of these countries a kind of indigenization or nativization is currently taking place, a process in which the domains of the language are expanding and in which increasingly endonormative standards are becoming established for usages which were once stigmatized as mistakes. This is opening the way to wider use of English in creative writing and to the institutionalization of local forms in schools, the media, and government . . . . English may well still be far from being a language of the emotions among the vast majority of its users; indeed, the institutionalization of English may be making it ever more difficult for those without English to close the social gap between "the classes and the masses." All the same, English is more and more firmly a part of everyday linguistic experience.
"New Englishes" λѤ˴ؤ˼ҲŪʻˤĤƤϡ#1255. "New Englishes" Υ饤ե ([2012-10-03-1]) Ȥ줿ޤեꥫαѸΤĤϰˤĤƤϡ#343. եꥫ¹αѸѡ ([2010-04-05-1])#412. 롼αѸ ([2010-06-13-1])#413. 롼ˤѸؤ language shift ([2010-06-14-1])#514. Nigeria ˤѸΰ֤Ť ([2010-09-23-1]) Ǽ夲ƤΤǡGramley αѸ˳ѥ˥ꡤβPDFեΤʤ "colonial expansion into West Africa" εͭѡ
Gramley, Stephan. The History of English: An Introduction. Abingdon: Routledge, 2012.
ޤ˸¤ʤޤǤϡΤΤ졤鸽ߤ˸äƻޤعߤƤΤǤ롥ܤη (stemma)ʸˡι¤ڡʪηޡȷϿޤʤɡ⤳̾ޤȤƤФ졤ڤˤʤ館ˤϡϵڤʤΤǤ롥¿οͤϤ˸Ƥ뤬褯ͤƤߤȤʤʤΤȤ䤬롥ߤˡ#1339. ɥ衼åѸ²ηޡʾ岼ȿžǡˡ ([2012-12-26-1]) ̾ΰ²ηޤ岼ȿžΤƤߤʤѤʴ롥
ǧθؤǤ복ǰե (conceptual metaphor) ˤС̸Ūˤ褯ѻǧΥѥ1Ĥ "EARLIER IS UP" 롥ܸǡֲˤΤܤסֻפȤ褦ˡŤۤǡۤȤФ롥ǧκˤϡή졤ާнϤʢˤäϡָˤϻޤήƤƤϤǤ롥οǰƬˤСŪԤΤϾ塤³ΤϲȤΤϡǧΤλǤ롥
ήϤΤ褦ʪˡ§§äʪˤĤƤС"EARLIER IS UP" γǰեΩ뤬֤ȤȤĹʪǰƬˤȡष "LATER IS UP" Ȥǰե⤢ΤǤϤʤĹСʬؤ⤯ʤ뤫Ǥ롥ʹ֤ưʪǤʤμڤɤɤؾ椬ӤƤ櫓ǤꡤäΤ벼ŤΤȤǧˡäƤ褵
äơǰե˰͵¤ꡤ塤ޤξ줦ϤºݤˤϵڷΤ̤Ǥ롥δȤФ̤δޤäϲäΤ
ʲϲ¬Ǥ롥ޤġʲΤΡˤ㫤Ȥ̣礤ΤǤϤʤϡο͡ǯĹԤ夲Ȥȯۤ쥢ŪʼȯۤǤȸ줽Ȥ櫓ŪǤȤˤϤľŪ뤯餤ˤŪǤȻפŤΡǯμԤϰΤ˰֤٤ʤΤȤȤŪˤϡαɸĴ鸽ߤϢʤҿŪ˼롤Ȥ̤⤢̤ȤƤϡ𤷤ߤζĴȤʤäƤ褦˻פ롥
Τ褦˽Ҥ٤ǡβϻνפȤȯۤ⤢롥ष˰֤Τˤ뤹٤ƤΤΤ٤Ƥ롤鲼ΤΤΤΤȤͤǤ롥ϡषߤ𤷤ζĴȤ̤褦˴뤬ɤ
ɤˤƸޤȤϡѤ˴Ѥ˴ؤǤ롥ϢơδѸ˵ҤˤĤͤ#253. Ѹ˵ҤĤˡ ([2010-01-05-1])#1340. Strang αѸˤ̵Ūҡ ([2012-12-27-1]) Ȥ줿
ޤڤ¾Ȥ뤳ȤˤĤ͡ʸΤǡ#807. ޤʪޤ ([2011-07-13-1])#999. ѲȾ ([2012-01-21-1])#1118. Schleicher η ([2012-05-19-1])#1236. ڤȡ ([2012-09-14-1])#1722. Pisani ۩ָϤǤס ([2014-01-13-1])#1578. ϲȤƤ ([2013-08-22-1])#1579. ָϿʪǤפȡ ([2013-08-23-1]) դεĺ
εϡ岼γǰե椷Ƥ饤ԥ졼ơɮʤ꤬Ȥˡ
2026 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2025 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2024 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2023 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2022 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2021 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2020 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2019 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2018 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2017 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2016 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2015 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2014 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2013 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2012 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2011 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2010 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2009 : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
ǽ: 2026-06-26 03:46
Powered by WinChalow1.0rc4 based on chalow