Re: Lexicalising Ergativity

{ 20040621,0245 | Peter Bleackley } "Suppose a language has a split-S
system, whereby there are two verb classes, one of which takes an
Erg/Abs argument structure, and one of which takes a Nom/Acc argument
structure. What are those classes likely to be?"

Emily replied:
"In fact, as far as I am aware this happens in ALL ergative systems, but
the split isn't exactly lexical, it's grammatical. Usually the present
or other unmarked form of the verb uses, say, the ergative form, while
the preterite/past/etc. uses the accusative system."

There's a rather obvious split in Pahlavi (Middle Persian); transitive and
intranstive verbs are declined differently in the past, due to the
split-ergative system in that language.  Transitive verbs use the ergative
form in the past alone; in the present they use the accusative system:

Present:
Man dew-an wen-em
1SG demon-PL see.PRS-1SG
"I see demons"

Past:
Man dew-an did h-end
1SG demon-PL see.PRF.PTCP COP-3PL
"I saw demons"

I'm using a plural example because the copula is often omitted in the 3rd
sing., and it would be impossible to tell which was the grammatical subject
of the verb.

Intransitive verbs, obviously, are inflected according to the subject in
either tense:

Ardaxshir o naxchir shud estad
Ardaxshir to hunting go.PRF stand.PRF
"Ardaxshir went hunting"

The system is somewhat obscure, of course, because the verbs (and
prepositions, and some of the more common nouns) are generally written in
Aramaic.  The above sentence would be written something like this: 'lthshyl
OL nhcyl OZLWN-d YKOYMWN-'t with the capital letters representing Aramaic
words instead of Pahlavi words.  In the past, kardan ("to do") is often
written out, which is good because the Aramaic equivalents of "to do" and
"to seize" are identical when written in Pahlavi shorthand.

cheers

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 9 Dial-up Internet Access fights spam and pop-ups – now 3 months FREE!
http://join.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200361ave/direct/01/

Reply