Re: Ergativity

Hallo!

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 10:41:44 -0500,
"Mark J. Reed" <markjreed@...> wrote:

> Okay, so let me see if I can summarize the terminology:
>
> Verb Arguments
>         A = Agent (transitive subject)
>         P = Patient (transitive object)
>         S = Subject (intransitive)
>
> Construct Categories
>         Name                    Groupings
>         Accusative              {A,  S} {P}
>         Clairvoyant             {A,  P,  S}
>         Ergative                {A} {S,  P}
>         Monster Raving Loony    {A,  P} {S}
Are there any MRL natlangs?

>         Tripartite              {A} {P} {S}
And then there are split-S and fluid-S systems, in which S
is subdivided into two classes which are grouped with A and P,
respectively.  Usually, an S that controls the action is grouped
with A and one that doesn't, with P.  In a split-S system,
each intransitive verb is either A-marking or P-marking
(usually, A-marking verbs are action verbs and P-marking verbs not);
in a fluid-S system, some verbs (such as verbs of motion)
may belong to either class depending on the whether the subject
controls the event, e.g.

My brother:A arrived yesterday.
vs.
Your letter:P arrived yesterday.

Split-S and fluid-S systems are also referred to as "active"
or "active-stative".

> Hierachical systems are morphologically and syntactically clairvoyant, but
> instead of simply context, they use a formally defined ranking of all
> nouns (the "animacy hierarchy") to distinguish A from P in two-argument
> constructs.
These languages usually also have "inverse" markers which are used
when the less animate noun is the A.

Greetings,

Jörg.

Reply