Re: non-accusative, non-ergative, non-active ...

David Peterson wrote:
>In a message dated 03/8/02 12:33:05 PM, christophe.grandsire@FREE.FR
>writes:
>
><<  If I had a language with no case affices, where word order in sentences
>
> > with
>
> > a transitive verb is SOV and in ones with an intransitive SV, could
>
> > that
>
> > language be meaningfully be classified as accusative, ergative, active
>
> > or as
>
> > not any of those three? >>
>
>     Based on this information alone, I think if it were going to be
>classified as something, it'd be the accusative, since the S is always in
>first position, suggesting that maybe semantically it doesn't change.
>Also,
>the O in the SOV and whatnot doesn't just refer to direct objects.  What
>about prepositional phrases? For instance, what would be the order of "He's
>crying in the den"?  Would it be "He in the den is crying"?  If so, then
>that
>would really suggest it's accusative, since the subject would remain ahead
>of
>both O clauses.
This is as yet all very sketchy, but probably "He in the den is crying".
However, "He eats cheese in the den" would probably come out as "He cheese
in the den eats", which possibly weakens you argument.

                                                    Andreas

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com