Re: Fourth Persons

The Obviative isn't limited to HAS or Direct/Inverse systems. It can appear in
almost any language. You also have to be clear exactly what you mean by
Obviative - there are a number of uses/definitions, IIRC. If it's just "other
third persons", it's pretty common in Native American languages, used for
non-focus arguments. For example, in a tale about Coyote, every third person
other than Coyote would be in the 4th. That's one use, anyway.

The "indefinite" combined with the Obviative is pretty common. I don't know what
you mean in #3 and 4, so I can't speak to that.


Aidan



----- Original Message ----
From: Eldin Raigmore <eldin_raigmore@...>
To: CONLANG@listserv.brown.edu
Sent: Tuesday, September 2, 2008 10:36:28 AM
Subject: Fourth Persons

Several different phenomena in various natlangs have been
called "fourth person" at one time or another by one professional-
linguist author or another.

Here are the ones I can think of at the moment (this list may, or may
not, be complete; does anyone know? If you do, please post the
answer here.)

1. Indefinite pronouns (e.g. "one" in English, "en" in French);
2. Obviatives in languages with Hierarchical Alignment Systems and
Direct/Inverse Voice Systems;
3. Long-Distance Reflexives (or L.D. Anaphora) in languages that have
them.
4. Logophoric Pronouns in languages that have them.

My question is this:
How hard is it to fit more than one of those features into a language?
Does anyone know of a natlang with more than one of them? How many
and which ones?
Does anyone know of a conlang with more than one of them? How many
and which ones?
Has anyone here ever made a 'lang with two of those features? Or
three? Or all four?
Is one of them easier to fit with the others than they are with each
other? Or are there two that are an easier fit to each other than
any other pair?