Abstract
Abstract This article compares the grammaticalizing human impersonal pronoun ('n) mens in Afrikaans to fully grammaticalized men and non-grammaticalized een mens in Dutch. It is shown that 'n mens and een mens can still be used lexically, unlike mens and men, and that ('n) mens and een mens are restricted to non-referential indefinite, universal-internal uses while men exhibits the whole range of (non-) referential indefinite ones. Despite the latter’s presence in the earliest Afrikaans data, it is argued not to have influenced the development of ('n) mens. This pronoun and Dutch een mens are also found to have syntactic functions other than subjecthood, unlike men. The contrast is attributed to their different degrees of grammaticalization. Lastly, the Afrikaans ‘man’-pronoun is shown to differ from its Dutch counterparts in relying on the second person singular for suppletion, though forms of ('n) mens are found to occasionally occur instead.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
