Re: Secret Agents or Agent Secrets?

Jim Grossmann wrote:
>
> Here are some questions that ought to be relevant to a number of us.
>
> Is an "agent" ALWAYS something that acts on something else?
>
> Or can an "agent" do actions without an object, like "jump" and "skip?"
>
The short answer, in my understanding, is yes, absolutely. The role of
"agent" isn't a function of whether or not there is an object involved.
The "agent" is the doer. I recall "patient" as the role of the thing
that is acted upon.

Laurie,
    who admits it's been a while since she studied semantic roles
milo@winternet.com
http://www.winternet.com/~milo