Re: Help in Determining Asha'ille Typology
From: | Andreas Johansson <andjo@...> |
Date: | Thursday, August 7, 2003, 15:12 |
Quoting Joe <joe@...>:
[snip lengthy preliminaries]
> > What I'm trying to discuss is the possibility of a language which has the
> same
> > case marking on transtive subjects and intransitive patients, and another
> one
> > on transitive objects and intransitive agents.
>
> Oh...I see.
>
> Sorry. But I don't see how such a system could possibly exist. Lets split
> this into its constituent parts:
>
> Lets have four cases: Subjective, Objective, Agentive and Patientive(First
> two in intransitive sentences, latter two in transitive) -
>
> I.AGE food.PAT eat - I cause food to be eaten (by me)('I eat food')
>
> Alright, now
>
> I.SUB fall - I cause myself to fall('I jump down', possibly)
> I.OBJ fall - I am caused to fall('I fall over')
>
> Okay, now, assuming these boundaries - you want to unify the Subjective with
> the Patientive case, and the Objective with the Agentive.
Yep.
> However, I would
> say that this is impossible(except, perhaps, through phonological changes,
> but leaving these out of the picture),
> thanks to the fact that these are
> opposite in meaning.
If a system such as this is "impossible", one arising from phonological
mergers would no doubt quickly mutate into something else. Probably all
intransitives would come to use the same case on the argument, so creating a
normal accusative or ergative system.
I too would have been prone to dismiss a system such as this as "impossible",
but after hearing of the Monster Raving Loony language (it collapses your AGE
and PAT as one case, and your SUB and OBJ as another), I'm forced to accept
that humans will happily use languages whose structure makes zero sense to me.
I therefore think one should have stronger arguments than appeals to common
sense before one declares a linguistic system to be impossible.
Incidentally, I don't think I've ever heard of a language that have different
cases for all four of your AGE, PAT, SUB and OBJ. Of course, ALF demands that
a such language also exists.
Andreas