Re: Active languages

Hi!

Jeffrey Jones <jsjonesmiami@...> writes:
> On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 09:57:05 +0200, Henrik Theiling <theiling@...>
> > Carsten Becker <naranoieati@...> writes:
> > > Hey all,
> > >
> > > I've got two question about Active languages. First, is
> > > there a need for a (anti-)passive voice in an active
> > > language and second, ...
> >
> > Converning the decisions for my active langs: Tyl Sjok has neither,
> > Qthyn|gai has both. :-)
> >
> > **Henrik
>
> Tyl Sjok does have argument deletion, however. With null head-marking???
Yes.  But whether it is dropped or deleted is just not obvious.  Quite
ambiguous thingy.

Still, a change in focus (which voice often implements) may be shown
with a focus particle (possibly additional to dropping (but not
deleting) an unimportant argument).

Further, existence of an argument can also be shown: either by simply
mentioning the argument, or by using the SKIP particle as as
replacement for an unmentioned (dropped) but existing argument.

OTOH, all particles are optional, so it's usually up to the listener
to infer the precise meaning. :-)))

**Henrik