Re: Triggeriness ...

Quoting Javier BF <uaxuctum@...>:

> Hello,
>
> >> This discussion of trigger languages is making me confused
>
> To be sincere, I don't see why people make such
> a fuss of this. Maybe because, instead of calling
> subjects "subjects", somebody thought in Tagalog
> the label "subject" was better changed to "trigger",
> so as to make it look really exotic or something.
>
> >Nothing to shoot down, as far as I can see...Such a system is sui generis
> >IMO-- the point being that you can focus (in my understanding, make a
> >subject of) any of the various possible arguments of a verb.  In Tagalog,
> >that means 1. Agent/actor (~"active voice") 2. patient (~"passive voice")
> 3.
> >instrument 4. location.
>
> The structure is not at all "sui generis",
Should I interpret that that Tagalog indeed _does_ work that way (which would
bury Christophe's position it can't be classified as acc/erg/etc), or that
there's other languages that does it? In that case, is there any name for this
structure?

                                                       Andreas