Re: inalienable possession
|From:||Christophe Grandsire <christophe.grandsire@...>|
|Date:||Tuesday, November 17, 1998, 11:46|
At 11:32 17/11/98 -0000, you wrote:
>Nik wrote :
>Christophe Grandsire wrote:
>> > It's near the same distinction that occurs between the ergative= and
>> > the nominative: the ergative can be used only with animates, the= nominative
>> > for unvolitional (very useful your word, Sally) animates and for every= kind
>> > of inanimates.
>> The ergative can be used with inanimates, it's just less common. "The
>> disease killed him", disease is inanimate, but it would be ergative, or
>> better yet "The rock crushed his head when it fell on him", rock would
>> be ergative, yet it's still ergative. It's just that ergative is
>> *usually* animate.
>I think Christophe was only speaking of the specific feature of his own newlanguage ;-)
>See the original message at= http://www.egroups.com/list/conlang/?start=3D18475
> Christophe Grandsire
|Sela Jemufan Atlinan C.G.
"R=E9sister ou servir"