Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: cases

From:Thomas R. Wier <artabanos@...>
Date:Wednesday, September 13, 2000, 0:34
Nik wrote:

> "Thomas R. Wier" wrote: > > What I disliked was the way in which a Latin-style case system was > > being foisted onto Romanian, despite the fact that it fits Romanian > > badly. > > Well, from what I understand, the "genitive/dative" is used largely for > genitive and dative functions.
But my point has been all along that case names are language-specific! There is no real "genitive" or "dative" function, but there are cases called by those names. There are thematic roles often associated with cases of those names -- possession and origin, and goal, respectively -- but there is nowhere near universality on what exactly constitutes genitive or dative. A good look at the various functions of very closely related Latin and Greek is proof of that.
> Perhaps "basic" or something like that > might be better for "nominative/accusative", but "genitive/dative" seems > fair.
Why basic? It's much easier to integrate those names into a distinction already current in syntactic theory: core cases (which govern S, A and P roles) versus oblique cases (which govern all other thematic roles). That's why I proposed those names in the first place. That's the generalization: the cases in Romanian, AFAIK, occupy the same semantic space as those two groups of thematic roles. ====================================== Tom Wier | "Cogito ergo sum, sed credo ergo ero." ======================================