# Celtic languages: to have



## WestFevalia

Hello,

In Breton, the verb _to have_ is said _kaout_ but it's sometimes transcribed by _bezañ_ (to be):
- _arc'hant_ _'zo ganin_ (money is with me => I have money _just now_)
- _arc'hant am eus_ (I have money).

Do you have the same in other Celtic languages?

P.S. Even the conjugation of _kaout_ is based on the verb _bezañ_.


----------



## Stoggler

All the other Celtic languages do not have a specific verb for "to have".  They all have constructions using the verb "to be" and a preposition.

In Welsh (the one Celtic language I know something about), you can translate "I have money" as:

Mae arian gyda fi
literally: "(there) is money with me"
This is shortened a little in spoken Welsh to: "mae arian 'da fi".

In the north of the country, there is a slightly different construction using a different preposition (namely: gan, which changes if it's used with a personal pronoun, as is usual in the Celtic languages with a lot of prepositions):
Mae gen i arian
literally: "(there) is with me money"

Not only is the preposition different but the word order is different too.  Also, the item being possessed undergoes soft mutation if preceded by specific words, for example:

I have a car = mae gen i gar (the word "car" undergoes mutation as it's preceded by the first person singular pronoun).

Scottish Gaelic (and Irish) also use similar constructions:

"I have a house" translates as:
Tha taigh agam
literally: "is house at me"

The Goidelic languages use a different preposition from the Brythonic languages, but it achieves the same result.


----------



## WestFevalia

Thank you Stoggler!
I've always thought this type of construction was very interesting.
Actually, I thought it was typical of Celtic languages until I heard that Finnish has the same contruction:
_Minulla on_... (On me is...)


----------



## Stoggler

Many languages around the world don't have an equivalent verb for "to have" or "avoir".  I think a lot of them do something similar to the Celtic languages.  Russian is another language that doesn't have "to have"


----------



## AndrasBP

Hungarian and Latvian are the same in this respect. 
In Latvian, just like in Russian, the construction might have appeared under the influence of Finno-Ugric languages.


----------



## spindlemoss

A few more Celtic languages:

Cornish uses _dhe_ ("to") for possession, so:

_Yma karr dhe Tamsin = _"Is car to Tamsin" > "Tamsin has a car"
_Yma karr dhedhi_ = "Is car to-her" > "She has a car"

You could use _gans_ ("with") too to say you just have something with you:

_Yma karr gans Stefan = _"Is car with Stefan" > "Stefan has a car with him"
_Yma karr ganso_ = "Is car with-him" > He has a car with him

It's the same principle in Manx, with prepositions such as _lesh_ ("with"):

_Ta gleashtan lesh Moirrey = _"Is car with Moirrey" > "Moirrey owns a car"
_Ta gleashtan lhee_ = "Is car with-her" > "She owns a car"

And with _ec _("at"):

_Ta gleashtan ec Oshin = _"Is car at Oshin" > "Oshin has a car"
_Ta gleashtan echey_ = "Is car at-him" > "He has a car"


----------



## spindlemoss

Stoggler said:


> I have a car = mae gen i gar (the word "car" undergoes mutation as it's preceded by the first person singular pronoun).



I really like your explanation (and colours), Stoggler. Just to be nit-picky, the word _car_ undergoes mutation because the element _gen i_ gets in the way of the verb and the subject, it breaks the usual word order: _Mae car gen i_ > _Mae gen i gar_.


----------



## Gavril

spindlemoss said:


> Cornish uses _dhe_ ("to") for possession, so:
> 
> _Yma karr dhe Tamsin = _"Is car to Tamsin" > "Tamsin has a car"
> _Yma karr dhedhi_ = "Is car to-her" > "She has a car"



I have also seen the preposition _*i*_ "to" used this way in Welsh (_Mae i mi X_ = "I have X"), although it may only refer to certain kinds of "having", and perhaps it is now considered old-fashioned usage (e.g. I saw _*i*_ used this way in a book from the middle of the last century).

One English->Welsh dictionary includes the phrase _*bod i*_ ("to be" + "to") under the meaning "have", but says that this phrase is used for "having relatives etc.", so I guess that one could say something like _Mae i mi ddwy fodryb_ "I have two aunts".

However, I don't understand what the dictionary means by "having relatives etc.", i.e. what generalization it is making from the phrase "having relatives". Can any native/fluent Welsh speaker help clarify?


----------



## spindlemoss

Yes, you're right, the construction with _i_ is possible. You wouldn't go round saying _Mae car i mi/fi_ instead of _Mae gen i gar/car 'da fi_ but it's a good way of expressing "a ... of mine/yours" or "one of my/your..." etc with friends and relatives, e.g.

_Wyt ti'n nabod Siân? Mae'n ffrind i fi_. "Do you know Siân? She's a friend of mine."

_Wncl i ti yw e?_ "Is he an uncle of yours/one of your uncles?"

_O'ch chi'n gwybod bod Mel a Mal yn blant i Dai Jones?_ "Did you know Mel and Mal were/are children of Dai Jones's?"

That's just off the top of my head. If I think of anything else I should mention, I'll post more.


----------



## djmc

This is a standard usage in Latin. Mihi est liber is the normal usage for "I have a book". The same usage is found in Classical Greek.


----------



## Sobakus

It is thought that PIE didn't have a verb expressing possession, and the Dative or Genetive + copula construction was used instead. This is the case in virtually all ancient IE languages, and in some modern ones as well as evident from this thread. Russian, for example has u (at, by) + Gen. + be.3.sg. and in some cases (like expressing age) Dat. + be.3.sg. I don't think this, or the similar Dative constructions in Latvian and Lithuanian, has anything to do with Finno-Ugric.


----------



## spindlemoss

Sobakus said:


> It is thought that PIE didn't have a verb expressing possession, and the Dative or Genetive + copula construction was used instead. This is the case in virtually all ancient IE languages, and in some modern ones as well as evident from this thread.



Does anyone know which IE languages developed a _have_ verb and its origin? I've started a little list with the help of Wiktionary. Please correct it or add to it if you can. I didn't think Indo-Aryan languages had a verb _have_ but I don't know enough about them to be sure.

*Germanic* languages e.g. Dutch _hebben_, Scots _hae _< Proto-Germanic _*habjaną_ ("to lift, take up") < Proto-Indo-European _*keh₂p-_ ("to take, seize, catch")

*Albanian* _kam_ < Proto-Albanian _*kapmi_ ("to lift, take up") < Proto-Indo-European _*keh₂p-
_
Albanian aorist & participle _patur _< Proto-Albanian _*pat(i)-_ < Proto-Indo-European _*poti-o-_, cf. Latin _potior_ ("to have a share in, take possession of")

some *Romance* languages e.g. Italian _avere_, Aromanian _am _<  Proto-Italic _*habēō_/_*haβēō_ < ? Proto-Indo-European _*gʰh₁bʰ-_ ("to grab, to take")

other Romance languages e.g. Galician _ter_, Spanish _tener_ < Proto-Italic _*tenēō_ ("hold, have") < Proto-Indo-European _*ten-_ ("to stretch, draw")

*Armenian* _ունենալ_ [unɛˈnal] < Old Armenian _ունիմ_ < Proto-Indo-European _*ōpn-_ ("to achieve")

some *Slavic* languages e.g. Czech _mít_, Sorbian _měć_, _měś_ < Proto-Slavic _*jьměti_, related to _*ęti_ ("to take") < ? Proto-Indo-European_ *h₁em-
_
*Greek* έχω [ˈe̞xo̞] < Ancient Greek _ἔχω_ ("to have") < Proto-Indo-European _*seǵʰ- _(? "control, power")

*Persian* داشتن [dɒːʃˈtʰæn] < Old Persian _√dar-_ ("to hold, have") < Proto-Indo-European _*dʰer-_ ("to hold")


_
_


----------



## ger4

Sobakus said:


> [...]I don't think this, or the similar Dative constructions in Latvian and Lithuanian, has anything to do with Finno-Ugric.


Actually, I think Latvian and Lithuanian differ here. Lithuanian has the verb _turėti_ >> which can be translated as 'to have' (compare Latvian _turēt_ >> 'to hold, to keep') --> Lithuanian: _jis turi_ ('he has') <> Latvian: _viņam ir_ (lit.: 'him is'). More examples here


----------



## Sobakus

^Sure, there is certainly a difference in that Latvian has no verb expressing possession, while Lithuanian and Russian have both the verb and copula constructions, with the verb being dominant in the former and copula constructions – in the latter. Choosing between them may at times be complicated. For an overview of ways of expressing predicative possession in Lithuanian here's a nice little paper (Lidia Federica Mazzitelli, "The expression of predicative Possession in Lithuanian"). [Article author and title added by moderator]


----------



## WestFevalia

Thank you all for your replies. I didn't know so many Indo-European languages used that kind of constructions instead of a verb like our avoir, have, etc.
And thank you Spindlemoss for your list. It would be very interesting to know where and when it originated (if it's possible of course!)


----------



## Copperknickers

djmc said:


> This is a standard usage in Latin. Mihi est liber is the normal usage for "I have a book". The same usage is found in Classical Greek.



But Latin does have a verb for having, 'habeo'. The dative construction is only used for basic possessive meanings. The same is true in French and I guess other Romance languages too: 'C'est a qui ce livre? C'est a moi'. Whose is this book? It's mine.

I can't speak for other Celtic languages but as I understand it, in Gaelic there are various prepositions used for have. There's 'tha taigh *agam*', 'there's a house at me'. But in other scenarios you might say 'tha cupla fhocal Ghaidhlig *orm*' - 'I have a few words of Gaelic', literally 'there's a few words of Gaelic to me'.


----------



## spindlemoss

Copperknickers said:


> I can't speak for other Celtic languages but as I understand it, in Gaelic there are various prepositions used for have. There's 'tha taigh *agam*', 'there's a house at me'. But in other scenarios you might say 'tha cupla fhocal Ghaidhlig *orm*' - 'I have a few words of Gaelic', literally 'there's a few words of Gaelic to me'.



Yep, change the preposition and you change the meaning. "Jock has a big head" could be:

_Tha ceann mòr *air* Seoc_
"A big head is *on* Jock"
= "Jock has a physically big head of his own" [inalienable possession]

_Tha ceann mòr *aig *Seoc_
"A big head is *at* Jock"
= "Jock has a big severed head" [alienable possession]

_Tha ceann mòr *an* Seoc_
"A big head is *in* Jock"
= "Jock has a big head / Jock is full of himself" [quality, disposition]

You can read about the above and more here.


----------



## elirlandes

Irish is the same.

Tá airgead agum
(there) is money at me

Tá airgead  agum, agut, aige, aici, aguinn, aquibh, acu
(there) is money at me, at you, at him, at her, at us, at you (pl), at them

_In Irish, we have to learn off how to "conjugate" all of the prepositions

Tá ceann mór *ar* Seán_
"A big head is *on* Seán"
= "Seán has a physically big head of his own" [inalienable possession]

_Tá ceann mór *ag *Seán_
"A big head is *at* Seán"
= "Seán has a big severed head" [alienable possession]


----------

