Talk:Instrumental case

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

To-do list for Instrumental case: edit · history · watch · refresh
  • Clarify the distinction between instrumental case and instrument as a semantic role.
  • Replace Latin with an example from a language that has a case actually called "instrumental", preferably one which isn't also used for other purposes.

Contents

[edit] eighth case, and instrumental

Who calls it the eighth case and why do they call it such a thing? Also, why have an example (in this case librum stylo scripsi) that has an ablative case and not an instrumental. I understand full well that this is an instrumental ablative, but why not use a russian example or a sanskrit example or an estonian or any of dozens of languages that actually have an instrumental case? I think it is a bit ambiguous to have a page on the instrumental case whose first example is of an ablative. Remember, the instrumental and locative (in the sense in/on, not at) cases were absorbed from PIE into the ablative case in latin. The ablative's primary function is in its name ab+fero, ferre, tuli, latus which was used for separation.--Josh Rocchio 17:47, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Fair warning, I will be deleting the eigth case nonsense, and changing the example to one in a language that actually has an instrumental case properly, unless the author responsibles cites the former, or can well argue the latter. This has been up a few days and has not gotten a response.--Ioshus(talk) 18:14, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
I see, the first one is one the to do list, I'll go ahead.--Ioshus(talk) 18:17, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] fifth case

There are two 'fifth' cases in Wiki, vocative and instrumental. Why are cases called by numbers anyway? Different languages have different orders of cases: Slovene (Nom, Gen, Dat, Acc, Loc, Inst), Croatian (Nom, Gen, Dat, Acc, Voc, Loc, Inst), Sanskrit (Nom, Voc, Acc, Inst, Dat, Abl, Gen, Loc). If these numbers are taken from Latin then 'eigth' case maybe isn't so incorrect. --Nik 193.77.150.213 17:26, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tamil

This article implies that Tamil has an instrumental-comitative case, which is not actually true. Tamil uses separate case endings to mark the instrumental (-āl) and the sociative (-ōḍu or -uḍaṉ). However, since Sanskrit uses the instrumental ending with a postposition to mark the sociative, traditional analyses of Tamil grammar classify it as having only one instrumental-comitative case. In fact, Tamil would probably be a better example than even Russian to demonstrate the instrumental case, because Russian uses the instrumental to describe states as well (eg: Я работал переводчиком: I worked as a translator). As far as I know, the Tamil instrumental does not have such usages, and is reserved for objects, real or metaphorical or even grammatical, by means of which something is accomplished. Gokulmadhavan 07:37, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] English transforming a noun into a past tense verb

It is incorrect to say that this occurs often. Speakers in Britain and New Zealand very rarely replace a noun with a verb. --Dave

[edit] Other languages apart from Russian?

Don't all Slavic languages have an instrumental case? Czech certainly does. HairyDan 21:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Bulgarian doesn't have this case (it's has just 2 cases!). I'm not sure how it's in macedonian. All other slavic languages have instrumental case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.54.62.200 (talk) 11:12, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Latin *Old English

Yeah, quit basing everything on Latin. Furthermore, where are the Old English examples? (I could have sworn that this was the English language Wikipedia?) —Ƿōdenhelm (talk) 07:45, 3 March 2008 (UTC)