"become an X"

[Vardelm]

What other ways, if any, do languages handle the concept of "becoming an X", where "X" is any noun? So, becoming a fireman, a mother, etc. etc.

I've seen a little bit about Lithuanian and Modern Hebrew using an inchoative aspect. Is that common? Do they use it for "becoming a <noun>" as opposed to regular verbs? Do they allow for other aspects to be used at the same time, so as to say "becoming" vs. "have become", etc.?

It's my understanding that there are languages that don't have a verb for "to be". If so, do they have a verb for "become" anyway? If not, how do they handle the idea?

[Viktor77]

In Latvian, the verbs for "to become" (tikt, tapt, and kļūt) form passives:

Māja tika nokrāsota brūna.
Māja bija nokrāsota brūna.
Māja tapa nokrāsota brūna.
Māja kļuva nokrāsota brūna.

Ie. The house was painted brown.

I haven't gotten to the point regarding to become something, but I will ask for you!

Spanish uses reflexives, the two you are looking for here are hacerse and convertirse en.

[Bob Johnson]

It's my understanding that there are languages that don't have a verb for "to be". If so, do they have a verb for "become" anyway? If not, how do they handle the idea?

It's actually the other way around for English -- part of "be" is derived from the PIE *bheu "become, grow into" grouping. There are other groupings mixed in via suppletion.

The Japanese copula <da> isn't exactly a verb -- it conjugates differently and so forth -- but anyway there's a separate verb <naru>:

大人になったら
otona ni na-ttara
adult DAT become-COND
if/when become an adult (i.e. grow up)

[Khvaragh]

Arabic has a LOT of verbs to express this, both encoded within the verb and expressed via the juxtaposition of a direct object with a special verb.
For example:
/tat_?\ab:a/ "he practiced medicine/was a doctor, or he received treatment" (most of these are contextually dependent and have additional meanings), /talas_?\:a/ "he was a thief", /tamal:aka/ "he was a king," /iftaqara/ "he became poor/was a pauper," /tafaq:aha/ "he was a scholar of jurisprudence/studied jurisprudence," /ta?\ar:aba/ and /ista?\araba/ "he became an Arab/was Arabicized," /tanas_?\:ara/ "he became Christian," etc.

These can also be expressed analytically (for Arabic) by a special class of "becoming verbs," which are usually associated with the verb /ka;na/ "he was," and so are termed "the sisters of ka:na." However, one does not say someone became X by using ka:na: /kuntu nadZ):aran/ means "I was a carpenter," and is semantically distinct from verbs expressing a change of state. /wujida/, which is semantically the closest to express the concept of "being" in the sense of "existing," also does not work, and literally means "it was found." Some of the most important are /as_?\baX\a/ (literally meaning "he was in the morning"), /s_?\a:ra/, /D_?\al:a/ (more literally "he remained or continued as"), /baqija/ (the same as the preceding), and more. Thus, one could say /as_?\baX\tu ka:tiban/ "I became an author."

[Miekko]

Finnish has a few ways of doing this:

muuttua/bunch of other verbs + noun in the -ksi case
this also works with adjectives.

there's another alternative too:
minusta tulee ...[nominative].
from-me comes (whatever), which mostly is used wrt occupations.

[Vardelm]

Finnish has a few ways of doing this:

muuttua/bunch of other verbs + noun in the -ksi case
this also works with adjectives.

"Muuttua" is "change", correct? And the "-ksi case" is translative? So the construction is "change into an X".

I think something similar to this might work well for me, although I'm not sure how my conlang will handle a translative meaning quite yet.

...the two you are looking for here are hacerse and convertirse en.

It's actually the other way around for English -- part of "be" is derived from the PIE *bheu "become, grow into" grouping.

I think other words like growth, transformation, conversion, etc. will work as well in place of "change" as I noted above. Funny how obvious this seems now.

there's another alternative too:
minusta tulee ...[nominative].
from-me comes (whatever), which mostly is used wrt occupations.

Nice! This is an approach completely different from anything I was thinking. I could maybe see something like "an X is created from me" in my conlang.

Thus, one could say /as_?\baX\tu ka:tiban/ "I became an author."

Any chance you'd be willing to provide some glosses? I have a hard time understanding your various examples.

I haven't gotten to the point regarding to become something, but I will ask for you!

Thank you!

Spanish uses reflexives, the two you are looking for here are hacerse and convertirse en.

Now this is quite interesting to me, especially in combination with Miekko's example of Finnish above.

Are those the reflexive forms of the verbs? A example sentence w/ a gloss would be really helpful.

I've recently "discovered" that my conlang will use a middle voice (it was a surprise inspiration), and I think it will work well here. Since the middle voice often carries reflexive semantics, I interested to see a bit more of how your Spanish examples work. I picture doing something like:

Code: Select all

I-1SG change-MIDDLE chef-DATIVE
I     change to.a.chef.
"I changed into a chef."

The dative might be an odd use here, but I'm not sure. I think it works since the middle voice would contrast the antipassive:

Code: Select all

I-1SG change-ANTIP chef-DATIVE
I     change to.a.chef.
"I changed a chef."

Thanks very much for the replies so far. They're quite helpful, and any more input is welcome.

[murtabak]

Malay/Indonesian does not have the verb "to be", but has "to become", hence:
Dia dokter ("He/she is a doctor")
Dia menjadi dokter ("He/she becomes a doctor")

Also, "to become adj." can be expressed as meN- + adj. (meN- is the usual active-voice verb marking, although in this case the meaning is stative/intransitive)
Rambutnya memutih ("His/her hair turns white"; meN- + putih (white) = memutih)

[linguoboy]

It's my understanding that there are languages that don't have a verb for "to be". If so, do they have a verb for "become" anyway? If not, how do they handle the idea?

I can't think of any languages which don't have a word "to be". I can think of some without a copula, but that's not exactly the same thing.

Irish has a distinct copula, but it's defective. The future budh is obsolete, so this tense has to be rephrased by means of a construction with the regular "be" verb, e.g. Beidh sé ina spásaire "He will be an astronaut" (lit. "in his astronaut").

In context, this would also translate "become". In fact, I can't think of an Irish verb with this meaning except éirigh "rise" and, as far as I know, that can only be used with predicate adjectives, e.g. Táim ag éirí ramhar "I'm getting fat". (I've occasionally seen this construction used with nouns, but not from native speakers.)

German has the verb werden, e.g. Sie wird Ärztin "She's becoming a doctor". It's also used in some cases where English would prefer "be". Note in particular:

Sie will Ärztin werden. "She wants to be(come) a doctor."
Sie will Ärztin sein. "She claims to be a doctor."

Swedish has blir (which is cognate to German bleiben "stay"), e.g. Hur kommer det sig att du blev snut? "How come you became a cop?"

In Welsh, the verb is dod "come", e.g. Rw i wedi dod yn athro. "I've become a teacher." I think mynd "go" can also be used this way in some contexts.

[Skomakar'n]

Swedish has either the native varda or the loanword bli[va], which work just like English become.

[Miekko]

"Muuttua" is "change", correct? And the "-ksi case" is translative? So the construction is "change into an X".

Muuttua is derived from muuttaa (basically detransitivized). Apparently, muuttaa is a causative derived from the indefinite pronoun "muu", 'other'. So basically, muuttua joksikin = to otherfy into something.

varda

from varða (or whatever), so lots of dialects have a l` there instead these days, e.g. mine: val`. they differ from English (but so does the Swedish copula), in that if you haven't been very influenced by English, they mostly take nouns without indefinite articles.

e.g. han är polis rather than han är en polis, han blir jägare instead of han blir en jägare, etc.

(Even tho' this difference may be disappearing, it's relevant to point it out because usage-differences of similar natures may not be an obvious dimension for conlangers to get into; some language may similarly alternate between two cases or whatever along lines similar to but distinct from those ones used in Swedish as for when an indefinite article (I actually think it's a numeral in that case?) or not in such contexts.)

[Yiuel Raumbesrairc]

Esperanto has the generic verb "igxi" :

Mi igxas lingviston. = I become a linguist.

But since Esperanto is what it is and that -igxi is intended as a suffix, it can use noun incorporation :

Mi lingvistigxas. = I become a linguist.

[Viktor77]

Sure, I'll provide an example of Spanish. And yes, those are the reflexive forms, convertir is convertirse and hacer is hacerse.

Me hice abogado cuando tenía 26 años de edad.
REFL.1PS made1PS.PRET in lawyer when hadIPS.IMP 24 years of age.
I became a lawyer when I was 26 years old.

Mi hermana se hizo rico puesto que se casó con médico.
My sister REFL.3PS made3PS rich since that REFL.3PS married3PS.PRET doctor.
My sister became rich since she married a doctor.

Convertirse is the same thing but more for nouns. There are also ponerse and vovlerse which are used with less permanent states as well as the phrase llegar de ser (to arrive to be) which is often used with professions.

[Miekko]

Esperanto has the generic verb "igxi" :

Mi igxas lingviston. = I become a linguist.

I am surprised that lingvist takes the accusative in that construction, given that it's not normally considered an object in most European languages in that context? OTOH, I figure this isn't one of the cases the famously succinct grammar of Esperanto accounts for at all.

[Ser]

Thus, one could say /as_?\baX\tu ka:tiban/ "I became an author".

Any chance you'd be willing to provide some glosses? I have a hard time understanding your various examples.

Same thing in other words:

1. "Encoded within the verb": these are verbs using the same roots as the nouns in question, often using the pattern V of verbs (taCaC:aCa):

/iftaqara/ "to be or become poor/a pauper" (cf. /faqiːr/ "poor", root f-q-r)
/taʕarːaba/ "to become an Arab" or "to be Arabized" (cf. /ʕarabiː/ "Arab", root /ʕ-r-b/).

2. "Via the juxtaposition of a direct object with a special verb": i.e. using a verb such as "become" with the profession noun behaving as its direct object:

/ʔasˤbaħtu kaːtiban/
I.became writer-ACC.INDEF

(I've always failed to see what's so special about these verbs though (they're generally treated apart from the rest). They take attributes that behave like their direct objects, so...?)

Me hice abogado cuando tenía 26 años de edad.
REFL.1PS made.1PS.PRET in lawyer when had.IPS.IMP 24 years of age.
I became a lawyer when I was 26 years old.

Mi hermana se hizo rica puesto que se casó con un médico.
My sister REFL.3PS made.3PS rich since that REFL.3PS married.3PS.PRET doctor.

Convertirse is the same thing but more for nouns. There are also ponerse and volverse which are used with less permanent states as well as the phrase llegar de a ser (to arrive to be) which is often used with professions.

Maybe a clearer way to put it:

A person becomes a (profession):
Hacerse (profession) (e.g. me haré abogado en sólo un par de años "I'll become a lawyer in just a couple of years)
Convertirse en (profession)
Volverse (profession)
Llegar a ser (profession) —generally used for the act of receiving the title/diploma

...And you don't use ponerse.

Of course, I'm only talking about being serious about actually taking a career. In other contexts, there's other stuff that could be used... For example, if you're an actor, you could use hacerse pasar por ("to fake being (a profession)"); or if you're choosing a "title" for yourself under your nick (as in other internet forums, here we do them by post count), or just any sort of not-necessarily-true title for yourself in a list or job application, you could even get to use "ponerse" (me puse profesor de idiomas ~"I wrote that I'm a language teacher" (while I'm actually not)).

[Yng]

Welsh uses dod and mynd ('to come' and 'to go') with the so-called predicate particle, 'yn', which does various things like this (including forming adverbs):

dw i'n dod yn feddyg - I'm becoming a doctor

This is the same as 'to become' with adjectives, but many adjectives have their own widely used verbs, like blino, 'to become tired' (in fact the adjective blinedig is comparatively rarely used and is typically replaced with wedi blino, which is the perfect participle if you want to interpret it that way and is used like a passive participle in English).

[Niedokonany]

In Polish you use the verbs zostać (which can also mean 'remain' in other contexts) or stać się (more rarely with a noun, I think). There's also a construction where the one becoming sb is expressed as an oblique argument, zrobił się z niego straszny łobuz made REFL from him terrible rascal, I can't think of anything analogous in English.

[Viktor77]

This is just one of many available constructions in Latvian, and not one used frequently by Latvians themselves:

"To use kļūt to express the concept of changing into something else requires the use of the preposition par and the accusative when you are referencing becoming a noun like fireman. Your sentence would translate to: Piecpadsmit gadu vecumā es kļuvu par ugunsdzēsēju.

Kas? Es. – Who? I.
Ko darīju? Kļuvu. – What did I do? I became.
Par ko kļuvu? Ugunsdzēsēju. – What did I become? A fireman.

However, this is just for nouns. If you’re changing into something expressed as an adjective, you don’t use par. For example, to say “I will become fast enough to play hockey”, fast is an adjective so the sentence translates to: “Es kļūšu pietiekami ātrs hokeja spēlēšanai.”

Kas? Es. — Who? I.
Ko darīšu? Kļūšu. — What will I do? I will become.
Kāds kļūšu? Ātrs. — What/Who will I become? Fast.
Cik ātrs? Pietiekami. — How fast? Enough.

As for why the adjective is in the nominative… The adjective here is agreeing with both kļūšu and es, assuming a male speaker. (Remember, Latvian verbs have built-in pronouns, so adjectives can agree with verbs in that way.) It answers the question “Kāds kļūšu?” (Kāds is nominative.) You can also think of it as “I = Fast”, so the two need to agree.

[NB: In order for ātrs to be accusative, it would have to agree with a direct object, which would then force kļūt to require par to have an accusative and then the sentence would be the noun case up above. ]"

[jan Sali]

Esperanto has the generic verb "igxi" :

Mi igxas lingviston. = I become a linguist.

The object marker -n is superfluous here. Please read subsection Ne uzu N-finaĵon ĉe perverbaj priskriboj of section 12.2.2. N por objekto and section 31.2. Fariĝi kaj iĝi of the Plena Manlibro de Esperanta Gramatiko.

[rickardspaghetti]

Swedish has either the native varda or the loanword bli[va], which work just like English become.

I didn't know bli was a loanword?

[Skomakar'n]

Swedish has either the native varda or the loanword bli[va], which work just like English become.

I didn't know bli was a loanword?

It's Germanic, but not Northern Germanic. Not sure of the period.
At least I think so. In any case, the current meaning has been influenced by the Western Germanic counterparts.

For another one you might not know of; did you know that träffa is a German loanword, and cognate to Swedish dräpa?

[hwhatting]

German has the verb werden, e.g. Sie wird Ärztin "She's becoming a doctor". It's also used in some cases where English would prefer "be". Note in particular:

Sie will Ärztin werden. "She wants to be(come) a doctor."
Sie will Ärztin werden. "She claims to be a doctor."

The first tranlation is fine, but the second? I've only ever seen Sie will Ärztin sein in the sense of "She claims to be a doctor." (Reading this again, I think that's the point you wanted to make - that English "she wants to be a doctor" indicates a state the subject wants to achieve, while the literal translation "Sie will Ärztin sein" in German would indicate a claim about a present state by the subject?)

Russian is one of the languages which normally doesn't use a copula in the present tense. For "become" it uses становиться / стать and what one becomes is in the instrumental case. For professions, there is also the construction идти в (lit. "go into"):
он пошёл в журналисты
on poshol v :zhurnalisty
he went in(to) journalists
The interesting part (from the POW of Russian) is that журналисты is a nominative plural, which otherwise cannot be dependent from a preposition. Historically, this is a remnant of the old accusative plural that in other constructions was replaced by the genitive plural form for animate nouns.

[linguoboy]

German has the verb werden, e.g. Sie wird Ärztin "She's becoming a doctor". It's also used in some cases where English would prefer "be". Note in particular:

Sie will Ärztin werden. "She wants to be(come) a doctor."
Sie will Ärztin werden. "She claims to be a doctor."

The first tranlation is fine, but the second? I've only ever seen Sie will Ärztin sein in the sense of "She claims to be a doctor."

Fuck, don't know how I screwed that up. Yeah, the whole point was to contrast werden with sein.

[Miekko]

Swedish has either the native varda or the loanword bli[va], which work just like English become.

I didn't know bli was a loanword?

It's borrowed from plattdeutsch. Everyone knows this.

[Travis B.]

Swedish has either the native varda or the loanword bli[va], which work just like English become.

I didn't know bli was a loanword?

It's Germanic, but not Northern Germanic. Not sure of the period.
At least I think so. In any case, the current meaning has been influenced by the Western Germanic counterparts.

Bli(va) is from Middle Low German bliven.

[Vardelm]

Bli(va) is from Middle Low German bliven.

Why did they change? Someone should have said "Don't stop... bliven...".


OK, that was really bad.