Re: Active languages

Hi!

Andreas Johansson <andjo@...> writes:
> Quoting Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@...>:
>...
> > (1) Lennára               hena      lennas.
> >     sing-PRES-3SG:P-3SG:A child-AGT song-OBJ
> >     `A child sings a song.'
> >
> > (2) Lennara         hena.
> >     sing-PRES-3SG:A child-AGT
> >     `A child sings.'
> >
> > (3) Lenná           lennas.
> >     sing-PRES-3SG:P song-OBJ
> >     `A song is sung.'
> >
> > (4) Lenna.
> >     sing-PRES
> >     `There is singing.'
> >
> > Yet, I call these "zero-agent" and "zero-patient" constructions
> > and avoid the terms "passive" and "antipassive" because I don't
> > think these can be properly called "verb voices", lacking any
> > kind of morphological marking on the verb (other than the
> > absence of agreement markers) or changes to the cases of the
> > nouns.
>
> My Tairezazh does essentially the same. I've never thought of this as voices;
> indeed, the original reason for introducing it was getting rid of passives.
>
> A voice interpretation would be rather perverse, since the object of a
> subjectless verb can't be the subject of a coordinated verb, but can be the
> object of one.
Let me express my view that this is at least the same process
implemented by voices.  Preventing it to be called a voice system
which be a missing characteristic marker on the verb.

Anyway, it looks similar to a voice system since if the above
sentences' translations are correct, the arguments that are dropped
are also *semantically* missing.  As I understand it, this is what
voices do.  Dropping an argument without this semantical deletion
would then clearly be something else.  Or does the third example mean

'Someone/I/You/We/He/She/They sing(s) a song'

i.e., is the agent just unexpressed and can be inferred or is it
missing, in which case a passive translation would be justified?

As I wrote recently, I'd distinguish:

   I don't know.        - argument explicitly expressed
   Dunno.               - argument dropped, but semantically present
   It is not known.     - argument deleted completely

If both interpretations (dropped or deleted) are feasible, depending
on context, it is also not quite like a voice system, but then,
arguing to wanting to get rid of voices means you have also gotten rid
of a bit of expressiveness.

**Henrik

Reply