Re: Plurality

On Wednesday, April 16, 2003, at 10:15  AM, H. S. Teoh wrote:

> An interesting thought occurred to me today. I've noticed that in
> languages that mark number on the verb, the number agrees with the
> number
> of the subject/agent. But has anyone thought about marking the number
> of
> the *object* on the verb instead? How possible is it to have the verb
> agree with the subject on person, but agree with the *object* on
> number?
>
> This occurred to me when thinking about how plural actions are viewed:
> one could view it as one vs. many agents performing the same action,
> or as
> one action affecting one vs. many objects. The person marking on the
> verb
> could still agree with the agent (indicating who is doing the action)
> but
> the number can agree with the objects (indicating how many things are
> affected by the action).
>
> Expecting an anadewism, :-)
In Tohono O'odham (Uto-Aztecan), person/number of subjects is marked on
an obligatory 2nd position element; there are 5 distinct forms: 1sg,
1pl, 2sg, 2pl, and 3. Object person/number is marked on the verb
proper; there are prefixes for first and second persons, and
reduplication for plurality.

This is not exactly the kind of thing you were looking for, but it's
similar. I've always found it to be an elegant pattern, and I've
adopted something like it in a newish project which has been on my hard
drive for about 2 years now. (I've really got to get back to it.)

Dirk
--
Dirk Elzinga
Dirk_Elzinga@byu.edu

"I believe that phonology is superior to music. It is more variable and
its pecuniary possibilities are far greater." - Erik Satie