Re: Active, Was: Help with grammar terms
|From:||daniel andreasson <daniel.andreasson@...>|
|Date:||Friday, January 14, 2000, 0:18|
Vasiliy Chernov wrote:
< some snipping has occured >
> For example, to say 'the tree threw down the man', one has
> to change the construction e. g. as follows:
> The-power-of-the-tree caused the man's falling
> ('The-power-of-the-tree' standing for an active derivative,
> and 'the man's falling' for a construction behaving like
> inactive noun).
> Do I confuse the terms? If so, what is the correct term for
> the situation described above (i. e. no marking when roles
> correspond to classes, special marking for the reverse case)?
It sounds a lot like the 'inverse' construction. This was
discussed some months ago on this list.
When the natural hierarchy of the language is broken,
a special form of the verb or noun is used. Example:
Hierarchy: 1p > 2p > 3p
1p acts on 2p > 'direct' form
I hit-DIR you = 'I hit you'
2p acts on 1p > 'inverse' form, because it breaks the hierarchy.
I hit-INV you = 'You hit me'
The thing you explain above seems to be some sort of mix
between this and active/passive voice and perhaps some
third ingredient, like an animate/inanimate distinction.
In any case it sounds really cool. I do hope someone else
have more info on this. Or if you, Vasiliy, feel like
investigating it a bit further of course. :)
Daniel Andreasson, who is straight and kinda liberal in the
Swedish sense, although I do have a friend who is black (who
btw is quite a corker in !xhosa).
"I am so smart, I am so smart, S-M-R-T... I mean S-M-A-R-T..."
- Homer Simpson
PS. I found that sig. appropriate since I just found out
I got the highest grade this term in linguistics. Hurray
for me! ;)