From: connolly@memstvx1.memst.edu
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: "Von Neuman style" (was: Russian dative + infinitive)
Date: 21 Aug 92 11:32:38 -0600
Organization: Memphis State University

In article <3999@svin02.info.win.tue.nl>, reinpost@wsinis02.info.win.tue.nl (Reinier Post) writes:
> In article <1992Aug15.234259.3037@memstvx1.memst.edu> connolly@memstvx1.memst.edu writes:
>>> 
>>> #         What, me worry?  (Alfred E. Neuman)
>>> #         Him learn Russian? Forget it!
>>
>>			are there analogues in other languages?  I'll
>>start with German: NO!  German infinitives are militantly subjectless
>>(well, most of the time);  the subjectless (1) is OK, (2) with accusative
>>"subject" is not, and (3) with nominative works only if the nominative
>>constitutes a *separate* question, indicating that it is not the subject
>>of the infinitive.
>>
>>	(1)  Was?  Russisch lernen?   'What?  Learn Russian?'
>>	(2)  Was?  *Mich Russisch lernen?   'Me learn Russian?'
>>	(3)  a.  Was?  Ich?   Russisch lernen?
>>	     b.  Was?  *Ich Russisch lernen?   'I learn Russian?'
> 
> I'll vote for your analysis (3a).  Why not treat the other examples this way?:
> 
> 	What? Me, worry?		<--	What? Me? Worry?
> 	Hmm! Me, doing linguistics!	<--	Hmm! Me! Doing linguistics!

(3a) is clearly right for German: any attempt to pronounce it as a
single entity with normal question intonation fails dismally. Only
the two-sentence analysis works.  But English is different.  While
the Neuman sentences (not: "von Neuman": solche Saetze haben mit dem
bekannten Computergenie nicht das geringste zu tun) *can* be broken
in two, they are perfectly acceptable as single units.
 
> If they're all chains of NPs, this leaves the form 'me' to be explained.
> Could this  - seemingly 'accusative' -   form have to do with emphasis, or with
> the fact that the pronoun appears in isolation?

Pronouns in isolation do have the accusative form in English, but
since the Neuman sentences are normally spoken as single units, the
pronouns are not isolated, so there's a problem.  In an earlier
post I pointed out that the verb in Neuman sentences is untensed,
and it seems to be true that English nominative personal pronouns
occur only directly before *tensed* verbs.  I believe this explanation
is correct: English pronoun case is based on position, not function,
while in German only function matters, position doesn't.

> Unlike 'me' in 'Me worry?', German 'mich' always has accusative meaning:

I suppose that by "accusative meaning" you intend to say: "the meaning
associated with direct objects".  If so, it's not true.  Consider:

	Er laesst mich nicht Fussball spielen.
	'He doesn't let me play soccer.'

_Mich_ is not a direct object and does not have the meaning of one, which
is why we can't say:

	*Ich werde nicht Fussball spielen gelassen.
	*I am not let play soccer.

Rather, _mich_ is the subject of _spielen_, whose direct object is
_Fussball_.  And consider the following:

	Heinrich, mich graust vor dir!
	'Henry, I shudder at you.'

Damit ist wohl Deine Erklaerung gerichtet, meine gerettet? :-)

> (Dear linguists in the audience, please cut me to pieces.)

I wouldn't think of it.  Die deutsche Sprache ist mir zu lieb.
By the way: since you have an e-mail address in the Netherlands,
maybe you could tell us whether Neuman sentences occur in Dutch?
 
--Leo Connolly