Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Active again.

From:H. S. Teoh <hsteoh@...>
Date:Sunday, March 30, 2003, 1:57
On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 06:32:13PM -0600, Peter Clark wrote:
> On Saturday 29 March 2003 05:55 pm, Sally Caves wrote: > > Joa~o has expressed some worries that too much of Conlang is off-topic. > > Okay, here's a question I have about natural languages of the "active" > > persuasion. What natural languages are considered "active," and why is > > this particular term invoked? > Check out Daniel Andreasson's thesis on active languages: > http://home.swipnet.se/escape/active.pdf
Cool.
> > Why "active"? The term does not seem intuitive.
> Because it sounds better than "split intransitive"? :) I suppose it's > because active systems can show the level of activity involved: "He > fell," means he deliberately fell, while "Him fell," means he slipped > on the ice or something. In the first example, he is an agent in his > falling, while in the second, he is the recipient of falling.
[snip] Hmm, sounds like active languages should better be termed "volitional languages"? T -- It's amazing how careful choice of punctuation can leave you hanging:

Reply

Peter Clark <peter-clark@...>