Re: CHAT: Prepositions governing nominative,(X)... case [was Re: CHAT: Back on the list; Anti-conlangingbigots]
|From:||Thomas R. Wier <trwier@...>|
|Date:||Wednesday, December 12, 2001, 7:50|
Quoting Matthew Kehrt <matrix14@...>:
> How much sense does it make to have the nominative and accusative
> marked, but the genetive unmarked?
> i.e., Eviendadhail:
> idan - man NOM
> edan - man ACC
> dan - man gen
Hmm. I don't have a clear example, but in Atakapa, you certainly
can get constructions that do not mark genitives at all:
(1) ha tal
(2) icak kaû añ
man dead house
'a dead man's house'
(3) yûkhiti icak kaû ha tal
Indian man dead he skin
'a dead Indian man's skin'
The question here, of course, is whether Atakapa also marks
nominative and accusative. I don't have any data on that,
but I suspect that you could get away with it. Russian,
for example, has a null ending in the genitive plural of
some nouns (nom. sg. _?kola_, gen. pl. _?kol_), but has
distinct nominative and accusative markers on those same
Thomas Wier <trwier@...> <http://home.uchicago.edu/~trwier>
"...koruphàs hetéras hetére:isi prosápto:n /
Dept. of Linguistics mú:tho:n mè: teléein atrapòn mían..."
University of Chicago "To join together diverse peaks of thought /
1010 E. 59th Street and not complete one road that has no turn"
Chicago, IL 60637 Empedocles, _On Nature_, on speculative thinkers