From Http://Members.Aol.Com/Lassailly/Tunuframe.Html wrote:
>=20
> Dans un courrier dat=E9 du 01/07/99 02:41:30 , Nik a =E9crit :
>=20
> > "J.Barefoot" wrote:
> > >
> > > I was trying to decide what cases to have in this language spoken =
near
> > > Asiteya, and in my notes I came across the mixed system of core ca=
ses:
> nom,
> >
> > > acc, and erg.
> >
> > In my first draft of Watakass=ED, I had such a system, but I soon
> > simplified it to an ergative system (with active-based pronominal
> > clitics)
>=20
> i feel like Jennifer so i have 2 classes of verbs. verbs based on
> intransitive states and verbs based on transitive states or actions. ho=
w is
> that kind of system called ? and Jennifer, could you please develop you=
r own
> design ?
Jennifer, Teonaht is also a "mixed system": I spent all last year
devising
what I called the "Split Nominative"; my system borrows not so much from
ergative languages as active languages and the distinction they make
between
an agent or "volitional" subject and an experiencer or "non-volitional
subject."
I decided to identify T. as basically a nominative/accusative language
with
a split nominative: volitional and non-volitional. Lately, I've
developed
a middle-voice that has some ergative tendencies, so my claim on my
"What Is
Teonaht" page is now a lie... that T. NEVER uses the patient (or what I=20
call the "object") to function as a subject. So the rule seems to be
that
anything goes in a conlang.
Sally
scaves@frontiernet.net
http://www.frontiernet.net/~scaves/whatsteo.html