Re: New Language Sketch (was Re: Conlang Gender)

"Thomas R. Wier" wrote:
> I would think that abstract concepts should be last on the list, and th=
at
> if you're going to have a separate category for them, you'd have them
> placed after inanimate objects.
Hmm, you might be right there.  Concepts following tangible objects does
make sense now that I think about it.

> I dunno... why does Icelandic have one?  Because historically
> it wasn't so strict, that's why.
True.  But why copy that (presumably) transitional stage in a conlang?

> (2) Barninu           batna=F0i             veikin
>      the.child:DAT  recovered.from the.disease:NOM
>      "The child recovered from the disease."
Well, dative subjects make sense for some kinds of words.  Consider
Spanish:

A Juan  le     gusta el  chocolate
To John to.him likes the chocolate
"He likes chocolate"

In Watakassi', I use datives for subjects with certain verbs as well,
verbs of emotion/experience, such as "fear" or "see" (using the same
verb, but with an ergative subject would turn the meaning into "look
at", i.e., the experiencer chooses to see the object)

> In all of these examples, the first word is the subject -- and yet
> each verb requires a certain case marking as a lexically determined
> feature of the verb.  Fun!
Makes perfect sense to me.  Nominative carries connotations of control.=20
The main use of it is agent, and an agent is volitional.  So, one could
argue that the use of nominative in forms like "I like chocolate" or
"the pain is not noticible" or "she lacks food" is an extension of its
core function.

--=20
"Old linguists never die - they just come to voiceless stops." -
anonymous
http://members.tripod.com/~Nik_Taylor/X-Files
http://members.tripod.com/~Nik_Taylor/Books.html
ICQ: 18656696
AIM Screen-Name: NikTailor