Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Active languages

From:Jeffrey Jones <jsjonesmiami@...>
Date:Wednesday, July 27, 2005, 11:42
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 13:32:00 +0200, Henrik Theiling <theiling@...>
wrote:
> > 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).
I didn't know "deleting" was distinct from "dropping". What exactly is the difference? Jeff
> 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

Reply

Henrik Theiling <theiling@...>