Re: Triggeriness ...

Barry Garcia wrote at 2003-12-12 20:15:50 (-0800)
 > Constructed Languages List <CONLANG@...> writes:
 > >No, but you belong to the same category.
 >
 > Yes, but we're *not* the same thing, which is what you suggest when
 > saying "why not call them cases?"

If you want to put it like that, we are the same thing, we're both
human.  We're just not identical.  No-one is suggesting that Tagalog
cases, if they are cases, are identical to those of any other
language, but only that they have the defining properties of the
category of case.

 > What "case" is the marker then?

It doesn't have to map to any particular case in different scheme in
order to be a case.  You can't point to the ergative case in Basque
and identify it from a list of Latin cases.  The Tagalog _ang_ marks
the "trigger case".  It's "something like a nominative or absolutive,
but different".  And _ng_ marks the non-trigger core case, and _sa_ an
oblique case, at least under some analyses.

 > I still do not see the trigger markers as case markers, because
 > they *do not* have any other role than to indicate where emphasis
 > of the verb is.

I don't think that's quite true.  The choice of which role takes the
trigger is a matter of indicating emphasis, certainly*.  This choice
is indicated through an inflection on the verb.  But the trigger shows
that this noun is in that role, yes?  Not unlike the nominative in an
accusative language, which indicates a different semantic role in the
argument structure depending on whether the verb is in active or
passive voice.

 > OK. But they also indicate relation to each other, right? If not,
 > then you may want to update the fine folks on the linguistics
 > mailing list.

The genitive indicates a relation to another noun.  A language doesn't
have to have a genitive case to have case-marking.

 > >I think you should update your understanding of "case".
 >
 > OK then Andreas, since you'be been rallying so hard to convince me
 > that it is case, then explain in *simple terms* as best you can
 > what case is *exactly*. Keep the terminology simple, keep it plain.

I'd say that, fundamentally, a case is a marker on a noun which
indicates its role in the argument structure of the verb (or outside
it, in the case of oblique cases and genitives).


* Where "emphasis" is left without any clear definition, but it's a
  pragmatic category of some kind.