SECTION VIII : VERBAL PHRASES AND OTHER
MODES OF EXPRESSION.
134. IN often uses the verb in cases where the Indo-European languages with which we are more generally familiar employ a substantive, adverb, etc. ; but the opposite also holds good.
135. IN forms abstract substantives just as Indo-European does. Thus from the WB ro,"to come", which is also used without any formative as a verb, Toba derives the substantive haroro, "arrival" < ha + ro reduplicated. — Illustration from the Sangmaima : "In order that they may know the time of my arrival" = In + order + that be + known time of arrival my = asa diboto bakta ni haroro nku.
136. Now the IN languages often use a substantival costruction in cases where as a general rule the better known Indo-European languages adopt the verbal construction; and that applies, in particular, to the verbs "to do ", " to intend ", "to think", "to say", "to be named ". This phenomenon can be styled Common IN. The IN substantives in question are either substantival WB's like Old Jav. don, Tag. ibig, "intention", or else derivative substantives like Old Jav. pagaway, "the making", which exists alongside of the WB gaway and the verb magaway.
I. Substantival construction with the ideas of "doing", "making". Old Jav., from the Prosody of Mpu Tanakung: "Well, what had you to do?" = What then making your = mapa kari pagaway ta.
II. With the idea of intention. Tag., from Tell: "Why do you crowd upon me (in the open road) ?"— What the intention your with me = ano an ibig niniyo sa akin. Old Jav.
203
