Who ate who?

For the discussion of language mechanics, grammar, vocabulary, trends, and other such linguistic topics, in english and other languages.

Moderators: gmalivuk, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Scyrus
Posts: 124
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 8:32 pm UTC
Location: Portugal

Who ate who?

Postby Scyrus » Wed Jul 14, 2010 12:12 am UTC

Hi.
In a philosophy class, the teacher was talking about ... something, because honestly I was doodling in my notebook and not paying attention at all.
At some point, he anounced that "O gato o cão comeu" (= The cat the dog ate), and then asked us who ate who (this may not work in English).

Even when a studant claimed that there was a comma missing for it to make sense, thus "O gato, o cão comeu" (= The cat, the dog ate), the question remained unchanged.

So. If we have "The cat the dog ate", who ate who?



P.S: I was the only one that came with an actual response which made the teacher laugh, for I drew a picture of a cat and a dog that prepetually ate a little more of the other and grew (much like Ouroboros, the snake eating its own tail) and made sure that their paws would be placed such as to make an infinity symbol. The teacher was amused.

User avatar
TaintedDeity
Posts: 4003
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 7:22 pm UTC
Location: England;

Re: Who ate who?

Postby TaintedDeity » Wed Jul 14, 2010 12:14 am UTC

The comma is important in this instance. Whether or not the comma is there decides who ate who, I think.
Also, that drawing sounds rather fun :D
Ⓞⓞ◯

Joeldi
Posts: 1055
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 1:49 am UTC
Location: Central Queensland, Australia
Contact:

Re: Who ate who?

Postby Joeldi » Wed Jul 14, 2010 3:21 am UTC

In English, it's not a sentence without the comma. If you were to say "The cat the dog ate was a tabby", then the dog had eaten the cat. "The cat that was eaten by the dog" means the same thing.

With the comma, it is a sentence, but an unnatural one. In this case the sentence simply means "The dog ate the cat".
I already have a hate thread. Necromancy > redundancy here, so post there.

roc314 wrote:America is a police state that communicates in txt speak...

"i hav teh dissentors brb""¡This cheese is burning me! u pwnd them bff""thx ur cool 2"

User avatar
poxic
Eloquently Prismatic
Posts: 4751
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 3:28 am UTC
Location: Left coast of Canada

Re: Who ate who?

Postby poxic » Wed Jul 14, 2010 3:24 am UTC

In English, "the cat the dog ate" means "the cat that was eaten by the dog".

In French, as a counterexample, "le chat le chien a mangé" ... is harder to tell, since I'm not a native speaker. It sounds like "the cat ate the dog", but you'd have to ask a better francophone than me. French has similar grammar to Spanish and Portuguese, but I know less Spanish and no Portuguese. So there you go.

Any native speakers of a more useful language here?

/partially ninja'd by Joeldi
A man who is 'ill-adjusted' to the world is always on the verge of finding himself. One who is adjusted to the world never finds himself, but gets to be a cabinet minister.
- Hermann Hesse, novelist, poet, Nobel laureate (2 Jul 1877-1962)

vaguelyhumanoid
Posts: 86
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 4:27 am UTC

Re: Who ate who?

Postby vaguelyhumanoid » Wed Jul 14, 2010 4:31 am UTC

The cat the dog ate" isn't a sentence, it's a phrasal noun.
In both English and Portuguese, though, the meaning would amount to "the cat (which) the dog ate".
In a non-SVO language it would be different.
What I wanna know is what the cat the dog ate did.
Spoiler:
tesseraktik wrote: of course you need to gornax your frifftop to a proper taibou (which, as the construction of this tempered tutatu suggests, consists of two bed.pans joined by a haiku), or else angry zubat are going to flork off your penis.'

Makri
Posts: 654
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 4:57 pm UTC

Re: Who ate who?

Postby Makri » Wed Jul 14, 2010 6:19 am UTC

Since Portuguese is SVO, it can only be that the dog ate the cat, where the cat has been topicalized. Just like in English. Of course, there will be a special intonation in Portuguese, which may be different from the English one.
Last edited by Makri on Wed Jul 14, 2010 12:51 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
¬□(∀♀(∃♂(♀❤♂)⟷∃♂(♂❤♀)))

User avatar
Iulus Cofield
WINNING
Posts: 2917
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:31 am UTC

Re: Who ate who?

Postby Iulus Cofield » Wed Jul 14, 2010 7:12 am UTC

vaguelyhumanoid wrote:The cat the dog ate" isn't a sentence, it's a phrasal noun.
In both English and Portuguese, though, the meaning would amount to "the cat (which) the dog ate".
In a non-SVO language it would be different.
What I wanna know is what the cat the dog ate did.


I concur. Although I'd say it's a noun phrase, which may or may not be arguing semantics. It follows the rule of dropping relative pronouns. No idea on the Portugese sentence, but y'all make it sound analogous.

goofy
Posts: 911
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 3:32 pm UTC

Re: Who ate who?

Postby goofy » Wed Jul 14, 2010 12:31 pm UTC

If Portuguese is like other Italic languages, then the relativizer cannot be dropped. So "o gato o cão comeu" can only be read as "the dog ate the cat" with "the cat" topicalized. Since English can drop relativizers, in English "the cat the dog ate" can be additionally read as "the cat which the dog ate".

User avatar
Roĝer
Posts: 445
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 9:36 pm UTC
Location: Many worlds, but mostly Copenhagen.
Contact:

Re: Who ate who?

Postby Roĝer » Wed Jul 14, 2010 3:01 pm UTC

This is so much easier in a language with an accusative.
Ik ben niet koppig, ik heb gewoon gelijk.

Makri
Posts: 654
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 4:57 pm UTC

Re: Who ate who?

Postby Makri » Wed Jul 14, 2010 3:12 pm UTC

Which is surely the reason for the frequent syncretism of nominative and accusative in the world's languages. :mrgreen:
¬□(∀♀(∃♂(♀❤♂)⟷∃♂(♂❤♀)))

User avatar
Scyrus
Posts: 124
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 8:32 pm UTC
Location: Portugal

Re: Who ate who?

Postby Scyrus » Wed Jul 14, 2010 8:39 pm UTC

In portuguese, the sentence (without the comma) means either one (or both) ate the other, but it is undefined. It could be hinted at with emphasis when spoken, however.
In english, it SEEMS to me that it's the same case, "The cat the dog ate." can be read both as "The cat, the dog, ate." (= The cat ate the dog) or "The cat, the dog ate." (= The cat was eaten by the dog = The dog ate the cat) <-----[The meaning, of course one is passive voice]

Please correct me if I'm wrong

supermario
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 3:46 am UTC

Re: Who ate who?

Postby supermario » Thu Jul 15, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Not a linguist (yet), so my opinion is not worth much in terms of grammatical truth. Intuition does tell me that the dog ate the cat, though. Dogs ARE generally bigger and arguably meaner than cats, so it's more probable that the dog did eat the cat and not vice-versa. :P

I can't recall if this is right, but I do remember reading some Spanish literature in which the object came directly before the verb. It might have just been my crazy teacher, though. I'll see if I can ask a native Portuguese speaker tomorrow.

edit: Portuguese speaker says that the dog ate the cat, can't explain why though
Last edited by supermario on Thu Jul 15, 2010 3:48 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

arpee
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 1:30 am UTC

Re: Who ate who?

Postby arpee » Thu Jul 15, 2010 8:02 am UTC

I would interpret it as a line of poetry. "The cat the dog ate" would mean "The cat, the dog are" or "The cat (which) the dog ate"

User avatar
Grop
Posts: 1994
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 10:36 am UTC
Location: France

Re: Who ate who?

Postby Grop » Thu Jul 15, 2010 9:46 am UTC

poxic wrote:In English, "the cat the dog ate" means "the cat that was eaten by the dog".

In French, as a counterexample, "le chat le chien a mangé" ... is harder to tell, since I'm not a native speaker. It sounds like "the cat ate the dog", but you'd have to ask a better francophone than me.


Actually, "le chat le chien a mangé" isn't grammatical. "the cat that was eaten by the dog" would be "le chat que le chien a mangé".

Jammerjoint
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 2:34 am UTC

Re: Who ate who?

Postby Jammerjoint » Thu Jul 15, 2010 6:09 pm UTC

The cat the dog ate.

A comma is irrelevant. There should be a grammatical distinction between subject and object in the language, as in Latin, where words are rearrangeable. If not, then there should be a proximity rule, i.e. subjects come first. If neither is present, then the language is a failure, because there is no way to distinguish between the subject and object.

Makri
Posts: 654
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 4:57 pm UTC

Re: Who ate who?

Postby Makri » Thu Jul 15, 2010 6:15 pm UTC

You forgot about intonation as a clue.
¬□(∀♀(∃♂(♀❤♂)⟷∃♂(♂❤♀)))

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Who ate who?

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Jul 15, 2010 6:54 pm UTC

Commas are not irrelevant grammatically, though, because they can for example tell you whether a relative clause is identifying or not.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

RabbitWho
Posts: 284
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 10:16 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Who ate who?

Postby RabbitWho » Thu Jul 15, 2010 9:59 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Commas are not irrelevant grammatically, though, because they can for example tell you whether a relative clause is identifying or not.



Example:

My sister who lives in France speaks French. = I have two sisters.
My sister, who lives in France, speaks French = I have one sister.


Surely "The cat the dog ate." Isn't a full sentence? Anymore than "John." is a full sentence. It should be something like "The cat (which) the dog ate was a prick." "Where is the cat the dog ate?"

Anyway I think here the cat has to be the object and the dog has to be the subject. I wish I could say why.

The nun (whom/which) my sister kissed (in Rome felt guilty.)

The woman (whom) my sister married (in Argentina is wonderful.)

Object, subject, past participle. What would you call this construction?
Subject, object, past participle is impossible, right? So there's no ambiguity in English in this type of sentence.

User avatar
gaurwraith
Posts: 285
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:56 pm UTC

Re: Who ate who?

Postby gaurwraith » Sun Aug 15, 2010 10:30 pm UTC

To me (non native) it goes like this:

The cat the dog ate: The cat that the dog ate
The cat, the dog ate: The cat ate the dog (otherwise no comma needed)

But in the end it seems to me that this is a linguistic equivalent to that "which way is the dancer spinning" gif
I am a lvl 89 sword barb

User avatar
aurumelectrum13
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:11 am UTC

Re: Who ate who?

Postby aurumelectrum13 » Sun Aug 15, 2010 11:30 pm UTC

RabbitWho wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:Commas are not irrelevant grammatically, though, because they can for example tell you whether a relative clause is identifying or not.



Example:

My sister who lives in France speaks French. = I have two sisters.
My sister, who lives in France, speaks French = I have one sister.


Am I missing something? I don't understand why your first sentence means you have two sisters. The first sentence just seems like the second sentence written by someone who hates commas. They mean the same thing.

JShilpetski
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 6:37 pm UTC

Re: Who ate who?

Postby JShilpetski » Sun Aug 15, 2010 11:48 pm UTC

aurumelectrum13 wrote:
RabbitWho wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:Commas are not irrelevant grammatically, though, because they can for example tell you whether a relative clause is identifying or not.



Example:

My sister who lives in France speaks French. = I have two sisters.
My sister, who lives in France, speaks French = I have one sister.


Am I missing something? I don't understand why your first sentence means you have two sisters. The first sentence just seems like the second sentence written by someone who hates commas. They mean the same thing.


In the first sentence, "who lives in France" is identifying the sister, akin to saying, "My sister, the one (of two or more) who lives in France speaks French."
In the second, sentence, "who lives in France" is simply describing the sister.

RabbitWho
Posts: 284
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 10:16 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Who ate who?

Postby RabbitWho » Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:45 am UTC

JShilpetski wrote:
aurumelectrum13 wrote:
RabbitWho wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:Commas are not irrelevant grammatically, though, because they can for example tell you whether a relative clause is identifying or not.



Example:

My sister who lives in France speaks French. = I have two sisters.
My sister, who lives in France, speaks French = I have one sister.


Am I missing something? I don't understand why your first sentence means you have two sisters. The first sentence just seems like the second sentence written by someone who hates commas. They mean the same thing.


In the first sentence, "who lives in France" is identifying the sister, akin to saying, "My sister, the one (of two or more) who lives in France speaks French."
In the second, sentence, "who lives in France" is simply describing the sister.


Exactly!
The first sentence is a defining relative clause; it is REALLY IMPORTANT to specify that my sister lives in France because otherwise you'd be like WAIT, JESUS CHRIST WHICH SISTER!? but in the second sentence it doesn't really matter that my sister lives in France. It's non-defining because I only have one sister.

User avatar
Scyrus
Posts: 124
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 8:32 pm UTC
Location: Portugal

Re: Who ate who?

Postby Scyrus » Tue Aug 17, 2010 11:47 am UTC

"The cat which the dog ate." just like that is an incomplete sentence. But "The cat ate the dog" and "The dog ate the cat" are both complete. So is "O gato o cão comeu".

darkcave
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2010 10:22 am UTC

Re: Who ate who?

Postby darkcave » Tue Sep 14, 2010 10:40 am UTC

Firstly, should the question you posted not be "Who ate whom?"

The cat the dog ate - the cat which the dog ate, the cat that the dog ate - but phrased like this it doesn't have a double-meaning in that it might be possible that the cat ate the dog.

RabbitWho
Posts: 284
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 10:16 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Who ate who?

Postby RabbitWho » Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:41 pm UTC

I finally got this far in my Spanish:

http://twitpic.com/2ordhg

Arf arf arf

User avatar
speakinggerman
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 8:34 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Who ate who?

Postby speakinggerman » Mon Oct 04, 2010 9:41 pm UTC

In languages which decline, i.e. which can mark nouns as subject or object by a suffix, flipping the order around doesn't cause a problem -
Examples: German, Russian.

Interestingly, this also holds if the distinction doesn't work in that particular instance:
There is a German song (from the wild 1848s) which tries to spur the listeners on. It says (among many other things)

Ob ... wir Altes nur verdauen
wie das Gras verdaut die Kuh
...
das tut, das tut was dazu.


translation:
Whether ... we only digest old stuff
as cows digest grass
...
does matter.


The point is that literally, the second line reads
as the grass digests the cow.

As I said above, this shouldn't be too much of a problem in an inflecting language.
But with nouns, you can only tell the difference between subject and direct object with singular males.
"Kuh" is female, "Gras" is neuter - but the meaning is sufficiently clear (agreed?), and the male examples provide a certain level of familiarity with this construction.

User avatar
KrO2
Posts: 236
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 9:35 pm UTC

Re: Who ate who?

Postby KrO2 » Sun Oct 10, 2010 4:52 am UTC

I think if this is supposed to be the whole sentence, subject-object-verb makes more sense than object-subject-verb. So the cat comes out on top.
But, more importantly, shouldn't this be who ate whom? Ordinarily I wouldn't care too much, but since we are talking about the accusative case....

Makri
Posts: 654
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 4:57 pm UTC

Re: Who ate who?

Postby Makri » Sun Oct 10, 2010 8:07 am UTC

Only that the poem in question is actually ungrammatical. In German poetry, word order rules are sometimes disregarded; or maybe another set of rules (from more ancient German?) is used, I haven't checked that.

It's rather difficult to come up with convincing cases of subject-object-inversion in German. The best examples I could think of are colloquial ones with clitic pronouns: "weil's die Anna net g'sehen hat" ("because Ann didn't see it" or "because it didn's see Ann")
And clitics are, of course, special with respect to word order...
¬□(∀♀(∃♂(♀❤♂)⟷∃♂(♂❤♀)))

User avatar
speakinggerman
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 8:34 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Who ate who?

Postby speakinggerman » Sun Oct 10, 2010 9:49 pm UTC

Makri wrote:It's rather difficult to come up with convincing cases of subject-object-inversion in German.


That's simply not true. The first example I just draw out the first news site I opened after reading your post:

Mit einer gewaltigen Militärparade hat Nordkorea den 65. Jahrestag der Gründung der kommunistischen Partei gefeiert. Den Aufmarsch nahm Diktator Kim Jong Il ab.


This was the 7th (or so) sentence I looked at. There was one more "x - verb - subject" sentence before, but it wasn't an object in the first position.
This effect is definitely not ungrammatical in German, and it occurs on a regular basis for emphasis.
... visit http://speakinggerman.wordpress.com !

Makri
Posts: 654
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 4:57 pm UTC

Re: Who ate who?

Postby Makri » Sun Oct 10, 2010 10:37 pm UTC

I should have been more precise. What I meant was inversion in the middle field. Of course, you can do it with the sentence initial topic position. And if I'm not mistaken, there's one intonation that is really ambiguous.
¬□(∀♀(∃♂(♀❤♂)⟷∃♂(♂❤♀)))

User avatar
speakinggerman
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 8:34 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Who ate who?

Postby speakinggerman » Mon Oct 11, 2010 7:25 pm UTC

Makri wrote:I should have been more precise. What I meant was inversion in the middle field.


And by that, you mean ... ?

Makri wrote:And if I'm not mistaken, there's one intonation that is really ambiguous.


Sorry, I'm at a loss here as well.
... visit http://speakinggerman.wordpress.com !

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 3463
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC
Location: Cleveland, Ohio

Re: Who ate who?

Postby Eebster the Great » Sun Nov 14, 2010 10:05 am UTC

The cat the dog ate ate the dog the cat ate.

cntrational
This guy's name is a utter lie.
Posts: 99
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 11:36 am UTC

Re: Who ate who?

Postby cntrational » Sun Nov 14, 2010 10:39 am UTC

I'd interpret "The cat the dog ate" as a phrase meaning "The cat that was eaten by the dog" and "The cat, the dog ate" as extremely awkward.

User avatar
comet
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 2:38 am UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Who ate who?

Postby comet » Sat Mar 19, 2011 5:14 am UTC

Eebster the Great wrote:The cat the dog ate ate the dog the cat ate.


Vicious.

Perfect illustration, though.

It would be perfectly clear in an agglutinative language with words/characters/phrases that are 'attached' to indicate whether a noun is a subject or an object. (Example: Korean).

User avatar
Velifer
Posts: 1132
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 4:05 pm UTC
Location: 40ºN, 83ºW

Re: Who ate who?

Postby Velifer » Mon Mar 21, 2011 2:26 pm UTC

Eebster the Great wrote:The cat the dog ate ate the dog the cat ate.

The ambiguous part of this is only how many animals we're talking about. Is it the obvious tautology of the cat eating the dog that the cat ate, or are there multiple feedings from different cats upon the same canid carcass? Were there multiple dogs, or a strange cat-dog oroboros?
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies have nothing to lose but their chains -Marx

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Who ate who?

Postby LaserGuy » Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:43 pm UTC

Scyrus wrote:In portuguese, the sentence (without the comma) means either one (or both) ate the other, but it is undefined. It could be hinted at with emphasis when spoken, however.
In english, it SEEMS to me that it's the same case, "The cat the dog ate." can be read both as "The cat, the dog, ate." (= The cat ate the dog) or "The cat, the dog ate." (= The cat was eaten by the dog = The dog ate the cat) <-----[The meaning, of course one is passive voice]

Please correct me if I'm wrong


Wouldn't the phrase, "The cat, the dog, ate" be better parsed as "The cat and the dog both ate", or, alternatively, "The cat, which is a dog, ate"?

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 3463
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC
Location: Cleveland, Ohio

Re: Who ate who?

Postby Eebster the Great » Mon Mar 21, 2011 10:14 pm UTC

Velifer wrote:
Eebster the Great wrote:The cat the dog ate ate the dog the cat ate.

The ambiguous part of this is only how many animals we're talking about. Is it the obvious tautology of the cat eating the dog that the cat ate, or are there multiple feedings from different cats upon the same canid carcass? Were there multiple dogs, or a strange cat-dog oroboros?

The most straightforward interpretation is certainly that a cat ate a dog, then another dog came along and ate that cat, but there are other possible interpretations. For example, a cat could eat a dog then throw it up, and another cat could come and eat it again before getting eaten by a larger dog.

The cat-dog ouroboros is my favorite interpretation, personally.

LaserGuy wrote:Wouldn't the phrase, "The cat, the dog, ate" be better parsed as "The cat and the dog both ate", or, alternatively, "The cat, which is a dog, ate"?

"The cat, the dog, ate" is simply ungrammatical. There is no reason to separate the subject from the verb with a comma here. The only exception to this I can think of is if you interpret "the dog" as an appositive, so you are actually describing the cat as "the dog."

So imagine if I named my dog "The cat." Then I might say something like "The cat (the dog) ate," or just "The cat, the dog, ate."

User avatar
Velifer
Posts: 1132
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 4:05 pm UTC
Location: 40ºN, 83ºW

Re: Who ate who?

Postby Velifer » Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:08 pm UTC

Eebster the Great wrote:The only exception to this I can think of is if you interpret "the dog" as an appositive, so you are actually describing the cat as "the dog."

That's right where I went too, but I suppose another one is perhaps that there is a creature called "ate" and this is a part of a list. The cat, the dog, Ate, and I ate.
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies have nothing to lose but their chains -Marx

User avatar
qvasi
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 8:27 am UTC

Re: Who ate who?

Postby qvasi » Wed Mar 23, 2011 9:04 am UTC

It depends on the word order of the language. The sentence "the cat the dog ate" must be in a language with either a subject-object-verb (SOV) or object-subject-verb (OSV) word order.
The default order of Portuguese and English is subject-verb-object (SVO) order for normal sentences (sometimes changed in special grammatical constructions).

In a SOV language the the dog is eaten
in a OSV language the cat is eaten.

In English this sentence is not grammatically correct unless "cat the dog" is a previously defined concept, in which case its a "The thing called "cat the dog" was eating"--- ;)

FilliP
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 6:14 pm UTC

Re: Who ate who?

Postby FilliP » Sat Apr 09, 2011 6:26 pm UTC

We discussed the alike example during the classes of linguistics and yes, it depends on the word order of the language. For example in Russian there is a sentences like Казнить нельзя помиловать, where depending on the punctuation and in oral speech - intonation, the sense may vary - Execute without forgiveness or It's forbidden to pnished, to forgive.


Return to “Language/Linguistics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests