Re: Active languages

Hello.
I hope the ignorance I display in this reply is remedied by others.
--- In conlang@yahoogroups.com, Carsten Becker <naranoieati@B...> wrote:
> I've got two question about Active languages.
> First, is
> there a need for a (anti-)passive voice in an active
> language
> and second, is there any typical active language
> whose verbal morphology I could have a look at ...
> [snip]
As for the second question:  If only I knew of a few good reference
grammars of a few Active/Stative languages!  I would answer this
question first.

As for the first question:
Most Active/Stative or Split-S languages are usually (I guess not
always) seen as having Active and Middle Voices.
Most are usually seen as not having Passive nor Anti-Passive Voices.

The question of an Active versus a Middle Voice comes up best in
languages that are Fluid-S, a subset of the Split-S languages.

As you no doubt know, in an Active/Stative language, some subjects of
some intransitive verbs are (always or sometimes) in the Ergative Case;
some subjects of some intransitive verbs are (always or sometimes)
in the Accusative Case.

The decision may be made based on the lexical stem of the verb;
it may be made based on the polarity (affirmative vs negative),
illocutionary force (declarative vs interrogative, e.g.),
tense, mood, or aspect of the verb;
it may be made based on the gender of the subject;
it may be made based on the grammatical person of the subject;
it may be made based on whether the subject is a noun or a pronoun.

In case a given intransitive clause can occur in two different equally-
grammatical forms, with the only difference being the case of the
subject; this is the Fluid-S subset of the Split-S (Active/Stative)
alignment.

In such clauses the two different cases for the subject,
have two different semantic interpretations.
Often these two interpretations are distinguished as,
if the case of the subject is Ergative, the clause is Active Voice;
if the case of the subject is Accusative, the clause is Middle Voice.
(This labeling and analysis applies only to clauses that could appear
in either form.)

A Split-S (Active/Stative) language could have the following five
classes of Intransitive Verbs, and the following five "classes" of
Nominals and Pronominals:
(I made up these labels.)

First, verb classes:

V1: Intransitive verbs whose subjects /must/ always be Ergative.

V1': Intransitive verbs whose subjects must be Ergative,
unless the subject is in "noun-class" N2 below.

V2: Intransitive verbs whose subjects /must/ always be Accusative.

V2': Intransitive verbs whose subjects must be Accusative,
unless the subject is in "noun-class" N1 below.

V3: Intransitive verbs which may take the same subject as either
Ergative or Accusative, depending on the semantics.

Now, "noun classes":
(frequently each is a gender, or a union of genders;
but, I guess, not always.)

N1: Nouns and pronouns which /must/ always be Ergative
when appearing as subjects of intransitive verbs.

N1': Nouns and pronouns which must be Ergative when the subject of
any intransitive verb except those in class V2 above.

N2: Nouns and pronouns which /must/ always be Accusative.

N2': Nouns and pronouns which must be Accusative when the subject of
any intransitive verb except those in class V1 above.

N3:  Nouns and pronouns which may appear as
either an Ergative Subject or as an Accusative Subject
for the same intransitive verb.

----

Obviously a language can't have V3 verbs without N3 nominals
and vice-versa; and those languages which do, are just the Fluid-S
languages.

Most active languages won't have both
all five classes of intransitive verb,
and all five "classes" of noun.
It makes sense that a language which has V1 verbs
probably won't have N2 nouns (it will have N2' nouns instead);
and a language that has V2 verbs
will have N1' nouns instead of N1 nouns.
(Of course the logic runs the other way, too.
A language with N1 nouns
will probably have V2' verbs instead of V2 verbs;
a language with N2 nouns
will probably have V1' verbs instead of V1 verbs.)

----

I'll have to finish later.

Reply