Da sau nu ? Ba da, ba nu...

I would not here note by the way that Tyndale here translateth no for nay, for it is but a trifle and mistaking of the Englishe worde : saving that ye shoulde see that he whych in two so plain Englishe wordes, and so common as in naye and no can not tell when he should take the one and when the tother, is not for translating into Englishe a man very mete. For the use of these two wordes in aunswering a question is this. No aunswereth the question framed by the affirmative. As for ensample if a manne should aske Tindall himselfe: ys an heretike meete to translate Holy Scripture into Englishe ? Lo to thys question if he will aunswere trew Englishe, he must aunswere nay and not no. But and if the question be asked hym thus lo: is not an heretike mete to translate Holy Scripture into Englishe ? To this question if he will aunswere trewe Englishe, he must aunswere no and not nay. And a lyke difference is there betwene these two adverbs ye and yes. For if the question bee framed unto Tindall by the affirmative in thys fashion. If an heretique falsely translate the New Testament into Englishe, to make his false heresyes seem the word of Godde, be his bokes worthy to be burned ? To this questyon asked in thys wyse, yf he will aunswere true Englishe, he must aunswere ye and not yes. But now if the question be asked him thus lo; by the negative. If an heretike falsely translate the Newe Testament into Englishe to make his false heresyee seme the word of God, be not hys bokes well worthy to be burned ? To thys question in thys fashion framed if he will aunswere trewe Englishe he may not aunswere ye but he must answere yes, and say yes marry be they, bothe the translation and the translatour, and al that wyll hold wyth them.

Thomas More, The Confutation of Tyndale's Answer.

Pe scurt : limba engleza avea patru raspunsuri, chiar daca azi mai are doar doua. Si anume, daca intrebarea avea forma afirmativa (Will our hero fail to bla bla ?) atunci raspunsurile disponibile sunt ca "yea" daca va reusi si "nay" daca nu va reusi. Daca in schimb intrebarea avea forma negativa (Will our hero not manage to bla bla ?) atunci raspunsurile disponibile sunt "yes" si "no".

Pentru ca, si-aici pacatul istoriei, yes e o forma contrasa in limba engleza, de la yea so, care inseamna... ba da. Iar no e o forma a unui fel de "niciodata" sau "nici intr-un caz".

Acestea fiind zise, regula e disputata in limba engleza (si-a fost disputata chiar pe vremea lui More, unii suspectind c-a inventat-o pe locⁱ doar ca sa se dea mare) dar totusi la o analiza pe text pare destul de bine respectata de la Chaucer pina la momentul criticii citate, chiar daca insusi Shakespeare mai greseste pe ici-pe colo.

In limba romana uzul e neclar si nesistematic (doara de-aia avem o cacademie a nepriceputenilor, sa ne povesteasca de aspectul substantival al verbelor si sa n-aiba habar de problema formulelor de raspuns) dar in mare s-ar parea ca perechile sunt neintuitiv da si ba nu respectiv ba da si nu. Adica, la intrebari pozitive ("Asa-i ca eroul va da chix ?") se raspunde da sau ba nu dupa caz, in timp ce la intrebari negative ("Asa-i ca eroul nu va reusi ?") se raspunde ba da si... da ?ⁱⁱ.

Evident, dacii i-au invatat pe englezi sa vorbeasca astfel (fiind relativ putine limbile in care exista patru forme) in cursul marii invazii de la anul 1066 toamna.

PS. Bonus puncte daca descoperiti pe undeva o contradictie.

1. Asa cum ma suspecteaza si pe mine lumea ca inventez reguli pe loc numa' de-al dracului, o pura coincidenta. [↩]
2. Si daca tot suntem la chitibusereala, care-i diferenta intre "Asa-i ca eroul nu va reusi ?" si "Asa-i ca nu va reusi eroul ?" ? [↩]