Re: ergative? I don't know...

On Sun, 25 Oct 1998, Nik Taylor wrote:

> Sally Caves wrote:
> > As for "antipassive," this is a term that is used mostly of
> > ergative languages, as I understand it--to express "partially affected
> > objects":  "He chopped at the tree," as opposed to "He chopped the tree."
>
> Actually, antipassive is a form analogous to the passive in accusative
> languages - it makes the ergative into an absolutive (A to S), while the
> former absolutive is placed in some other case.  It can be used to make
> the agent into the topic, in the same way that we use the passive to
> topicalize the patient.  It's also used to indicate an unknown object,
> analogous to our use of the patient for unknown agent.  I suppose that
> partially affected objects may be covered by the antipassive, at least
> in some languages, but that's not central to what the antipassive is.
Yeah... but my point to Mathias was--what the #%^ does it have to do with
volitionality?  IOW don't make me a clock if I just ask for the time.

Sally
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sally Caves
scaves@frontiernet.net
http://www.frontiernet.net/~scaves/teonaht.html

Rin euab ouarjo vopy vytssema tohda uo zef:
ar al aippara brottwav; ad kemban aril yllefo
brotwav fenom; vybbrysan brotwav an; he ad
edirmerem brotwav kronom.

"A cat and a man are not all that different.
Both are on my bed; both lay their head on their
arm; both have mustaches; both purr when they
sleep."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++